The problems of Russian history and Russian historiography, of course, could not pass by the attention of a person who, according to A. S. Pushkin, was the world history himself. Peter I certainly wanted to have a full-fledged "history of Russia", which corresponded to the modern level of scientific knowledge. For its preparation, several Russian scribes were planted alternately. However, it was somehow impossible, the task was not on the shoulder of domestic Herodotes and Fucidamas, whose mental abilities of their unlucky descendant described by one expressive line: "The mind is unricking, the fruit is short-lived science." In the end, the king had to appeal to the Russian history there, where he was used to contact everyone, - to Europe. A year before death, February 28, 1724, Peter I signed a decree, who said: "To teach the academy in which languages \u200b\u200bwould have been studying, as well as other sciences and noble arts and translated the books."
Since Peter's death, there were no one and a half dozens of years, as Russia received full-fledged historical work. And all the most wonderful was the fact that the Academy with its visitors was versed by adjunctions and private affiliates had no relation to this. Inquiry in this case and the bulk of the work took over one person, while there is no direct rushes to historical science. His name was Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev. He, in fairness, can be considered the father of Russian historiography.
Tatishchev is interesting not only as a historian, but also as a type of practical figure brought up in a huge Petrovskaya workshop. According to the definition of Klyuchevsky, he is a sample of a person, "the spirit penetrated by the spirit who learned her best aspirations and well-served to Fatherland, and meanwhile, who did not receive any extraordinary giving, a person, a low rising over the level of ordinary medium people." His figure opens a number of brilliant amateurs of Russian science and culture of the XVIII century.
In 1704, eighteen years old from the genus, Tatishchev decided on the army artillers. In Petrovsky, a man rarely finished the service where she was starting. Over the forty years of their official activity, Tatishchev visited a mining engineer who manage the mint in Moscow and the Astrakhan governor. After being deleted from the business in 1745, he, until death (1750), lived in his near Moscow estate - the village of Boldino. All this time he was under the court on charges of leather. The exclusive sentence was made a few days before his death.
Talking a mountain case, Tatishchev collected geographic information about localities, where it was assumed to lead the development of ore deposits or build plants. Russian geography on the natural flow of thoughts fascinated him to Russian history. Gradually, the collection and study of the ancient Russian monuments, written and real, turned into a genuine passion for him. Tatishchev became probably the most outstanding reader of the then Russia. He did not miss a single Russian and foreign book about history and charged making discharge and translations from Latin and Greek authors. Later, he confessed that, starting to write his "history," had more than a thousand books at hand.
Tatishchev perfectly understood the importance of foreign sources for the ancient history of Russia and skillfully used them. But over time, they did not make a special value of his work, but a unique Old Russian monument, which we have a concept only thanks to extensive extracts from it Tatishchev. This is the Ioakimovskaya chronicle attributed to the Novgorod St. Bishop of Joachim Korsunin, the contemporary of Prince Vladimir I Svyatoslavich. She was known to Tatishchev in the late list of the middle of the XVII century, but retained an ancient Slavic legend, which did not fall into other chronicle archives. Introduction to her and led Tatishchev to the conclusion that "Nestor-chronicle of the first princes of Russian not very good concurrent was."
In fact, who did not confuse this sudden principle of Russian history, dated in the "Tale of Bygone Years" 859: "Imaha Dan Varyati on Slovenia"? Why "Imaha", with what time "Imaha" - all these questions are hanging in the air. Following the Varyags on the historical stage, as "God from the car" in an ancient Greek tragedy, a Rurik appears with brothers and ruus. According to the Ioamakhovsky same chronicles, it turns out that Nestor begins with the end of a very long and very intriguing story.
In time immemorial, the prince lived in Iliriya Sloven with his people - like. Staying once from theated places, he led to the north, where he founded the great hail. Slovenia became the founder of the dynasty, which by the time of the calling of Rüric numbered 14 generations of princes. Under Prince, the drizzle, Ruriki Pradade, Slovenia entered into a long war with Varyags. The victims of a serious defeat on the Kyumen River, which served the borders of the Novgorod and Finnish lands, Burvaya fled from the Great Grade, whose residents became Varya Danniki.
But for a long time owned by Varyagi Great Grave. Having imposed on them to the tribute, Slovenia was ashamed of his son of the Genomysland in the princes of his son. When he appeared, Slovenia was rebuilt and driven by Varyags.
During the long and glorious replacement of the Gostomysl, peace and order were established on the Slovenian land. But by the end of his life, the inner turmoil and the external danger began to threaten the Great History, because the Gostomolym had no heir: his four sons were killed in wars, and he married three daughters for the neighboring princes. Worried by heavy thoughts, the Gostomysl appealed to the Council to Vrashats in Kolmogard. Those proceeded that he inherits him the prince of his blood. Gostomysl did not believe the prediction: he was so old that his wives had no longer to give birth to him. But soon he dreamed wonderful sleep. He saw that from the womb of his middle daughter, a great and fruitful tree rose; It covered all the great hail under his crown, and all people of this land were saturated from his fruit. Waking up, the Gostomysl called on Magi, so that they interpreted his dream, and heard from them that she was dying and would make his heir to the light.
Doubts of the Gostomysl on this, however, did not smallele. After all, he already had a grandson from the eldest daughter, and if the question of the transfer of inheritance on the female line, it was natural to offer him the princely table to him, and not his youngest brother. The Gostomysl still decided to rely on the will of the gods and told about his meaning the people. But many Slovenia did not believe him and did not want to forget about the rights of the senior grandson. The death of the Gostomysl caused civil engine. And only bubbling Lih, Slovenia remembered the stateless dream and invited the printe the son of Umila, Rurik.
In the presentation of his understanding of the Varangian question, Tatishchev relied on the previous experiences of Russian history - Sinopsis (published in 1674) Bayer's property of Varyags. Following the spirit of the first, he gave the vocation of the princes the nature of naturalness - the Slavs called not a stranger, and the grandson of her prince. Bayer Tatishchev borrowed a critical method of treatment of sources and the very formulation of the problem: the ethnicity of Varyagov-Russia and the place of their habitat. But entering the leadership of Sinopsis and Bayer to the region of ancient Russian history, Tatishchev then acted independently. He did not go to find the birthplace of the first Russian princes into either Prussia or Scandinavia. Varangian (Russian) Umila's husband was, in his opinion, Finnish prince. In the proof of His words, Tatishchev led a lot of historical and philological evidence of the long-time existence of the root of Rus in the toponymy of Finland and Southeast Baltic. And yet, over his historical search, the shadow of Bayer: The story of Varyagov-Russia in Dorurikov period was in Tatishchev in no way connected with the history of Slavs. No wonder Klyuchevsky called him a Russian historist, clinging for eternally carrying European idea.
The work of Tatishcheva was under the even more serious trial than the one he himself was pursued by the court of history. In 1739, Tatishchev brought the manuscript of his essay to St. Petersburg and paid for reading his familiar and influential persons in the then scientist of the world, in the hope of positive feedback. However, according to his own words, some reviewers pointed him for a lack of philosophical view and eloquence, others have indignant to the encroachment on the reliability of the non-beauty chronicle. With the life of Tatishchev, the story was never published.
Soon after his death, the fire destroyed the Boldin archive. From the manuscripts of Tatishchev survived only what was in other people's hands. According to these faulty lists, published in 1769-1774, Russian readers and familiarized themselves with the "Russian history". In full and closest to the original "History" appeared only in 1848
Attacks on Tatishchev, however, did not stop. Ioaakimovskaya chronicle introduced into scientific turnover for a long time considered almost a hoax. K. N. Bestuzhev-Ryumin, expressing the general opinion of historians in the middle of the XIX century, even wrote that it was impossible to refer to Tatishchev (though, later he revised his views and with due respect to refer to the works of the first Russian historicist: "History" Tatishchev, The monument of perennial and conscientious works, erected under the conditions of the most unfavorable, remained incomprehensive and unpleasant for a long time ... Now none of the scientists do not doubt the conscientiousness of Tatishchev "). Then the skepticism of historians was transferred to the information themselves reported by the Ioamakh chronicles. But recently, confidence in their historians has increased significantly. Now you can already talk about the Ioamakhova chronicle as a source of paramount importance, especially in the part concerning the "Dururic" era.
P.S.
Thanks to the daughter of V.N. Tatishchev became the great-grandfather poet F.I. Tyutchev (on the motherboard).
Tatishchev Vasily Nikitich (1686-1750) came from a noble, but impoverished nobleman, studied at the Petrovsk artillery and engineering school. In 1713-1714. He continued his studies in Berlin, Bresslavl and Dresden. He participated in the military campaigns of Peter, in particular in a Poltava battle. He served in Berg and manuff colleges. In 20-30 years, with small breaks, managed the official plants in the Urals (founded Ekaterinburg). In 1721, the mining schools of the Urals opened on his initiative. In 1724-1726 was located in Sweden, where he supervised the teaching of Russian young people mining, studied the economy and finance. Upon return, appointed a member, then the head of the coin office (1727-1733). In 1741-45 was the Astrakhan governor. After the resignation moved to his estate in his Moscow region and did not leave it until his death.
V.N. Tatishchev The written writer in geography, ethnography, history, including the first generalizing work on the Russian history "Russian history from the most ancient times." Other works: "Lexicon Russian" (before the word "keynik"), "brief economic to the village the following notes", was published by the judiciary 1550 with his notes.
One of the important educational achievements of Tatishchev was a new understanding of man. He declared "non-heighteners of a person," trying to justify this situation with the help of the theory of "natural law", which he was adherence. According to Tatishchev, freedom-descendant benefit for man. By virtue of various circumstances, a person cannot use it reasonably, so it should be imposed on it "of the captivity". "Unwind," as a scientist believed, inherent in a person or by "Nature", or "in his will" or "forced." The subane of the person is evil, which Tatishchev compared with sin, and in itself it performed "counterproof the law of Christian" (Tatishchev 1979: 387). In fact, Tatishchev was the only one of the domestic thinkers of the first half of the XVIII century, who raised the question of human personal freedom. For him, this issue was decided primarily due to the serfdom existing then. Tatishchev did not speak out, openly against his cancellation, but in his works this idea is clearly traced. It is possible to come to such a thought by consistent analysis not only by the statements of the researcher that "the will of the Natural Man of Toliko is needed and useful", but also the independent findings of the scientist arising during the characterization of the socio-economic development of Russia. Tatishchev conducted a comparison with other states, for example, with ancient Egypt, thereby showing what kind of benefit can receive the country when the peasants are released from any dependence (Tatishchev 1979: 121). The question of personal freedom was also decided by scientists from the point of view of the theory of "natural law".
The concept of serfdom, proposed by Tatishchev, is as follows: the serfdom is the unshakable basis of the system that existed in that period, but as a phenomenon it has a historical nature. Its establishment is the result of the contract, but, according to Tatishchev, the contract should not be applied to children who have agreed, therefore, the serfdom is not forever. Therefore, the existence of serfdom in Russia is illegal. Despite such conclusions, Tatishchev did not consider it possible to abolish the fortress dependence in the modern Russia. In the remote future, this should happen, but only after discussion, during which the most reasonable decision will be developed on the abolition of serfdom.
Staying on the peasant question, Tatishchev paid special attention to the problem of runaway in the Ural region. Having found that the flight of peasants, mostly Old Believers, had a wide scale, he suggested using their work at the Gornozavodsky enterprises of the Urals. Repeatedly pointing to the lack of workers, Tatishchev sought the possibilities for attracting various categories of the population to work at the enterprises, thereby proving the need for the liberation of peasants from the serfdom and the benefit of civilian labor. The scientist spoke out for the organization was wondered for people, for a long time worked at the factory, which once again emphasizes his care for a person as a worker.
By participating in the political events of 1730, Tatishchev, although in the veiled form, but still made a restriction of the monarchy. Representing in 1743 a note "Arbitrary and consonant saying." in the Senate, he himself without knowing, according to G.V. Plekhanov, "writes a constitutional project" (Plekhanov 1925: 77). The main thing, for which Tatishchev spoke, is a strong executive power that should be concluded not only in the monarch, but also in bodies to help him in managing the state. Offering to elect "Other Government", the scientist determined the principles of their organization, which can be acceptable and in modern Russia: the absence of locality upon receipt of posts, reducing funds for the content of the device, legitimate elections and the other.
In his works, Tatishchev conducted a class division of Russian society. The main attention was paid to them to the nobility, as the most progressive layer in the country. Particularly highlighted the researcher a trade layer - merchants and artisans. He not only defined their responsibilities, but also repeatedly stressed that the state should take care of them, since due to their activities there was a constant replenishment of the treasury, and, therefore, an increase in the country's revenues.
Arguing about the lawmakers, the scientist expressed a number of wishes that related to the creation of the Code of Laws. These wishes are aimed primarily to ensure that all parties in Russia are regulated by legislative acts, which means that relations between all members of society and the state should be based on a contract that should not be verbal, and a written contract.
The integrity of the worldview of Tatishchev determines its composite such as rationalism, freedomity, a waste from providationism, independence and independence of judgments, kindness, work for the benefit of the state ", concern for man, the development of secular sciences and enlightenment. Despite this, contradictions are observed in the views of the scientist. This was also manifested in its attitude to the Academy of Sciences, statements regarding the serfdom and preserving the privileges of the nobility, the definition of the provisions of other estates of Russia.
Tatishchev was a man anticipating his time. He did not see the social force in Russia, to which it is possible to rely on transformations aimed at capitalization of Russian society. After trying the experience of Western European countries to Russia, the researcher understood the futility of his ideas that could not be implemented in full. The state itself prevented the implementation of the designs of Tatishchev. Despite the fact that in Russia, thanks to the efforts and reforms of Peter I, there were serious shifts in social, economic, political and spiritual areas, and their large numbers did not meet support among the population. The scientist saw that in Russia did not exist that the strength on which it is possible to rely on transformations in the state. Therefore, he hoped to support the nobility conservative, but at the same time of the most educated class of Russian society, able to influence the further accelerated development of Russia. With such difficulties faced during his Board of Catherine II. This state of affairs, from our point of view, only shows the complexity in the development of Russia in the first half of the XVIII century, and by no means in the state of thinkers who expressed educational ideas. In such a thinker, the characteristic features of the enlightenment quite clearly traced in whose worldview, and Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev was.
V.N. Tatishchev "Russian History"
According to V. Tatishchev, history is the memories of "former acts and adventures, good and evil."
His chief work is "Russian History". Historical events were brought in it until 1577. Tatishchev worked on the "history" about 30 years, but the first edition at the end of the 1730s. He was forced to recycle, because She aroused comments from the members of the Academy of Sciences. The author hoped to bring the story to the top of Mikhail Fedorovich, but did not have time to do it. About the events of the XVII century. Only preparatory materials are preserved.
Chief work V.N. Tatishchev
Justice should be noted that the work of V.N. Tatishchev was very severely criticized, starting with the XVIII century. And until today, the final consent about his work among historians is not. The main item of the dispute is the so-called "Tatischevskaya Izvestia", which did not reach us the chronicle sources used by the author. Some historians believe that these sources were fictional to Tatishchev himself. Most likely, nor confirm nor refute such statements are no longer possible, so in our article we will proceed only from those facts that exist irrefutable: Personality V.N. Tatishchev; its activities, including state; his philosophical views; His historical work "Russian history" and the opinion of the historian S. M. Soloviev: The merit of Tatishchev before historical science is that he was the first to begin historical research in Russia on a scientific basis.
By the way, the work has recently appear, in which the creative heritage of Tatishchev is revised, and his works began to reprinted. Do they really have something relevant to us? Imagine yes! These are questions about the protection of government interests in the field of mining, vocational education, a look at our story and modern geopolitics ...
At the same time, it is impossible to forget that many of our well-known scientists (for example, Arsenyev, Przhevalsky and many others) served to Fatherland not only as geographers, paleontologists and geodesists, they performed the secret diplomatic tasks that we are not reliably known. . This also applies to Tatishchev: He repeatedly performed the secret tasks of the leader of the Russian military intelligence of Bruce, personal instructions of Peter I.
Biography V.N. Tatishchev
Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev was born in 1686 in the village of Boldino, Dmitrovsky district of the Moscow province in the family of a deceased and no longer-known nobleman, although he originated from Rurikovich. Both brothers Tatishchev (Ivan and Vasily) served as crawls (the slack was engaged in serving Mr.) at the courtyard of Tsar Ivan Alekseevich to his very death in 1696
In 1706, both brothers were enrolled in the Azov Dragun Regiment and in the same year were produced in Lieutenants. As part of the Draghun Regiment, Avono Ivanov went to Ukraine, where they were attended by hostilities. In the battle of Poltava Vasily Tatishchev, and in 1711 he participated in the Protian campaign.
In 1712-1716 Tatishchev improved its education in Germany. He visited Berlin, Dresden, Breslavla, where he studied mainly by the engineering and artillery case, supported the connection with the Feldsister General Ya. V. Bruce and fulfilled his instructions.
Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev
In 1716, Tatishchev was produced in an artillery guiltle engineer, then he was in the current army under Königsberg and Danzig, where he was engaged in an artillery economy device.
At the beginning of 1720, Tatishchev was appointed to the Urals. Its task was to define places for the construction of iron ore factories. After examining these places, he settled in the Uktus factory, where he founded the mountain office, then renamed the Siberian Higher Mountains. On the Iset River, he laid the beginning of the current Yekaterinburg, pointed the place for the construction of a copper smelter near the village of Svyshikha - it was the beginning of the city of Perm.
Monument V. Tatishchev in Perm. Sculptor A. A. Uralsky
At the factories, his efforts were discovered two primary schools and two schools for the mining. He also dealt with the problem of saving forests and creating a shorter road from the Uktus plant to the Utkin Pier on Chusovoy.
V. Tatishchev at the Ural Plant
Here, Tatishchev had a conflict with a Russian entrepreneur A. Demidov, an expert on the Mining and Farm, an enterprising figure who was able to maneuver among court wine and seek exclusive privileges for themselves, including the rank of a valid Stat adviser. In the construction and institution of government factories, he saw an undermining of his activities. To investigate the dispute between Tatischev and Demidov, the Ural sent was G. V. De Gennin (Russian military and engineer of German or Dutch origin). He found that Tatishchev in all came true. According to the report directed by Peter I, Tatishchev was acquitted and produced in the advisers of the Berg-College.
Soon he was sent to Sweden on mining issues and for the execution of diplomatic instructions, where he stayed from 1724 to 1726. Tatishchev examined the factories and mines, gathered drawings and plans, brought the granular master in Ekaterinburg, collected information about the trade in the Stockholm port and the Swedish The coin system, met many local scientists, etc.
In 1727, he was appointed a member of the coin office, which was then subordinated by minting yards.
Monument to Tatishchev and Wilhelm de Gennin in Yekaterinburg. Sculptor P. Chusovitin
In 1730, when joining the throne, Anna John, the era of bironovshchy begins. You can read more about this on our website :. With Biron, Tatishchev did not have a relation to the relationship, and in 1731 he was given to the court on charges of bribery. In 1734, after liberation, Tatishchev was appointed to the Ural "for breeding factories." He was instructed to draw up a mining statute.
With it, the number of factories has increased to 40; Constantly opened new mines. An important place was occupied by the Tatishchery Mountain grace with a large field of magnetic Zheleznyak.
Tatishchev was an opponent of private factories, he believed that state-owned enterprises are more beneficial for the state. By this, he called "Fire on Himself" by industrialists.
Biron tried every way to free Tatishchev from a mining. In 1737, he appointed him to the Orenburg expedition for the ability of Bashkiria and the Bashkir Management Device. But here Tatishchev showed his uncomfortable: he achieved that Yasak (tribute) deliver Bashkir elders, and not Yasachniki or Corolovniki. And again the complaints fell on it. In 1739, Tatishchev arrived in St. Petersburg to the Commission to consider complaints about him. He was accused of "attacks and bribes", non-execution and other sins. Tatishchev was arrested and planted in the Petropavlovsk fortress, sentenced to deprivation of ranks. But the verdict was not executed. In this hard for him, he wrote his instruction to his son: "spiritual."
V.N. Tatishchev was released after the fall of the Biron's power, and already in 1741 he was appointed Governor to Astrakhan. His main task was the cessation of unrest among Kalmykov. Until 1745, Tatishchev was engaged in this ungrateful matter. Ungrateful - because for its implementation, neither military forces nor the interaction on the part of the Kalmyk authorities lacked.
In 1745, Tatishchev was dismissed from this position and forever settled in his near Moscow estate Boldino. It was here that the last five years of his life he dedicated work on his main labor - "Russian history." Died V.N. Tatishchev in 1750
Interesting fact. Tatishchev knew about the date of his death: he ordered his grave in advance, asked the priest the next day to join him, after that I said goodbye to everyone. During the day to death, the courier brings him a decree, which was said about his forgiveness, and the Order of Alexander Nevsky. But Tatishchev did not accept the Order, explaining that he was dying.
Burodelen V.N. Tatishchev at the Christmas graveyard (in the modern Solnechnogorsky district of the Moscow region).
Mogila V.N. Tatishchev - Monument of History
V.N. Tatishchev is a great-grandfather poet F.I. Tyutchev.
Philosophical views of V.N. Tatishchev
Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev, who is rightfully considered to be an outstanding scientist-historian, "the father of Russian historiography" was one of the "chicks of Petrova's nest". "All I have - ranks, honor, estate and most importantly above all - the mind, the only thing about the grace of His Majesty I have, because if he did not send me in other people's edges, I did not use anything that was not notable, but I didn't encourage I could not get anything, "so he himself appreciated the influence of his life of Emperor Peter I.
Monument V. Tatishchev in Tolyatti
According to the convictions of V.N. Tatishchev was a faithful supporter of autocracy - he remained and after Peter I. When Peter I, Kurland Duchess Anna Ioannovna, was erected at the throne in 1730, with the condition that the country will manage the Supreme Secret Council, Tatishchev was categorically against the restriction of the imperial power. Anna Ioannovna surrounded himself by the German nobles that began to finish all the affairs in the state, and Tatishchev opposed the Zasili Germans.
In 1741, the daughter of Peter I Elizabeth came as a result of the palace coup. But the public views of Tatishchev, his independent nature, freedom in judgments did not have to moral and this sovereign.
The last five years of life of seriously ill tatishchev devoted labor over the history of the Fatherland.
Historian for work
He understood the life as continuous activities in the name of public and state benefits. In any place, the most difficult work he performed in the best possible way. Tatishchev highly put the mind and knowledge. Leading essentially a wicked life, he collected a huge library of ancient chronicles and books in different languages. The circle of his scientific interest was very wide, but the main attachment was history.
V.N. Tatishchev "Russian history"
This is the first scientific generalizing work in Russian history. By the type of material of the material, his "History" resembles the ancient Russian chronicles: the events in it are set out in a strict chronological sequence. But Tatishchev was not just rewritten by the chronicle - he handed them to the content of more accessible to contemporaries, supplemented them with other materials and in special comments gave its own evaluation of events. This was not only the scientific value of his work, but also novelty.
Tatishchev believed that knowledge of history helps a person not to repeat the mistakes of his ancestors and morally to improve. He was convinced that historical science should be based on the facts hoped from sources. The historian, like the architect for the construction of a building, should take away all the suitable materials from the pile of materials, to be able to distinguish reliable documents from those that trust do not deserve. He collected and used a huge number of sources. Many valuable documents found and published it: a set of laws of the Kiev Rus "Russian Pravda" and "judicial officer" Ivan IV. And his work became the only source from which it is possible to find out the content of many historical monuments, subsequently destroyed or lost.
Tatishchev sculpture in Wuit (Tolyatti)
Tatishchev in his "history" paid a lot of attention to the origin, mutual communications and geographical location of the peoples who inhabited our country. This was the beginning of development in Russia ethnography and historical geography.
For the first time in domestic historiography, he divided the history of Russia into several basic periods: from IX to XII centuries. - unifiedness (ruled one prince, the power passed by inheritance to his sons); From the XII century. - The cover of the princes for power, the weakening of the state as a result of the princely interdiscructures, and this allowed the Mongol-Tatars to conquer Russia. Then the restoration of the Ivan III one-chisty and strengthening it Ivan IV. A new weakening of the state in troubled times, but he could defend his independence. With Tsar, Alexei Mikhailovich autocracy again was restored and reached a heyday during Peter Great. Tatishchev was convinced that the autocratic monarchy was the only form of government for Russia. But the "Russian history" (I volume) was published only 20 years after the death of the historian. Tom II was released only after 100 years.
Famous Russian historian S. M. Solovyov wrote: "... Its important is that he first began to process Russian history, as it should be started; The first gave the concept of how to make a business; The first showed that such a Russian history, which means exist for studying it. "
Tatishchev's scientific activity is an example of a disinterested ministry of science and education: he considered his scientific work as a debt before the Fatherland, the honor and glory of which were over all.
Our story about V.N. Tatishchev, we want to finish the passage from the articles of the city newspaper Togliatti "Wolly City", in which the well-known and little-known results of the activities of V.N. Tatishchev.
Well-known
Under his leadership, the state (state-owned) mining industry of the Urals was founded: more than one hundred ore mines and metallurgical plants were built.
He modernized the assignment in Russia, created and mechanized the Moscow Mint and began industrial coquiscation of copper and silver coins.
He founded (personally and the rules of drawings) of Orsk, Orenburg, Yekaterinburg and our Stavropol (now Togliatti). Reconstructed Samara, Perm and Astrakhan.
Organized vocational schools at government facilities, the first national schools for Kalmykov and Tatars. Compiled by the first Russian-Kalmyk-Tatar dictionary.
Collected, systematized and translated from Church Slavic to Russian the first annals and state documents of the Moscow kingdom of the Middle Ages. On their basis, he wrote the first "Russian history".
Prepared scientific works and service notes on philosophy, economics, state construction, pedagogy, history, geography, philology, ethnology, paleontology, archeology, numismatics.
Litless
He is the author of the foundations of the first constitution (monarchist) of Russia. By the way, she acted in the country of 50 days!
I found and organized the first archaeological excavations
Capital of the Golden Horde - Shed.
Personally drawn the first detailed (large-scale)
Map of Samara Luke and most of the river YiK (Ural).
The Geographical Atlas and the "General Geographical Description of Siberia", introduced the name of the Ural Mountains to this, called the stone belt.
Prepared by the Aland Congress (the first negotiations on the truce with Sweden).
Compiled projects of shipping channels: between the Volga and Don, between the Siberian and European Rivers of Russia.
Brilliantly owned ten (!) Languages: I read freely and talked in French, German, English, Swedish and Polish, knew several Turkic languages, Church Slavonic and Greek. Participated in improving the Russian alphabet.
By studying the pharmacology, I experimented a lot and created new drugs based on hoods of coniferous trees.
Autograph V.N. Tatishchev
Vasily Tatishchev deservedly occupied the honorable place among the great minds of Russia. It is simply not rotated to call it ordinary. He founded the city of Tolyatti, Yekaterinburg and Perm, led by the development of the Urals. For 64 years of his life, several works wrote, the main of which is the "Russian history". About the importance of his books says the fact that they are published today. It was a man of his time leaving the rich heritage.
Young years
Tatishchev appeared on April 29, 1686 in the family estate in the Pskov district. The family led his origin from Rurikovich. But kinship was distant, the princely title did not relieve them. His father was not a rich man, and the estate moved to him after the death of a long-range relative. The genus of Tatishchev was constantly serving the state, and Vasily did not exception. With her brother Ivan at the age of seven, he was sent to the courage of King Ivan Alekseevich as a slack (servant, the main responsibility of which was serviced at the table during the meal). On the early years of Tatishchev G. Z. Yulyumin, the book "Youth of Tatishchev" was written
Historians have no definite opinion about what he did after the death of the king in 1696. It is known that in 1706, both brothers entered military service and took part in military actions in Ukraine in the rank of Lieners of the Dragun Regiment. In the future, Tatishchev took part in the battle under Poltava and the Prut Cam.
Performance of orders of the king
Peter first noticed by the smart and energetic young man. He instructed Tatishchev to go abroad to explore engineering and artillery sciences. In addition to the main travel mission, Tatishchev performed secret orders of Peter of the First and Yakova Bruce. These people had a great influence on the life of Vasily and were similar to it for educational and a wide range. Tatishchev visited Berlin, Dresden and Bereslavl. He brought many books in the engineering and artillery art to Russia, which at that time it was very difficult to get. In 1714, he took Avdotia Vasilyevna to his wife, the marriage of which ended in 1728, but brought two children - the son of Efgraff and the daughter of the Evrapopaccia. According to his daughter, he became the great-grandfather Poet Fyodor Tyutchev.
His trips abroad stopped in 1716. According to Bruce's command, he turned into artillery troops. A few weeks later, he already passed the exam and became an engineer-guarantor. 1717 for him passed in the army leading the fighting under Königsberg and Danzig. The main responsibility was the repair and maintenance of artillery economy. After carrying out unsuccessful negotiations with the Swedes in 1718, among the organizers of which were Tatishchev, he returned to Russia.
Yakov Bruce in 1719 proved Peter to the first one that it is necessary to compile a detailed geographical description of the Russian territory. This duty was assigned to Tatishchev. It was during this period that he actively became interested in the history of Russia. Finished the compilation of cards did not work, already in 1720 he received a new appointment.
Guide to the development of the Urals
The Russian state required a large amount of metal. Tatishchev with his experience, knowledge and hardworking was suitable for the role of managing all the Urals, like no other. In place, they developed violent operational exploration activities, the construction of new plants or the transfer of old ones to a more appropriate place. They also founded the first schools in the Urals and the job instruction on the procedure for cutting the forest was written. At that time, they did not think about the preservation of trees and this once again speaks of his foresight. It was at that time that it was laid by Ekaterinburg and a plant near the village of Svyshikha, who served as the beginning for the city of Perm.
Changes in the region were far from all. The most Yarma hater became Akinfiy Demidov, the owner of many private plants. He did not want to follow the rules established for all and saw in the treated plants a threat to his business. Even the tax state in the form of a decade did not pay. At the same time, he was in good relations with Peter first, so he counted on the cross. His subordinates in every way prevented the work of civil servants. Disputes with Demidov occupied a lot of time and nerves. In the end, due to the views of Demidov from Moscow, Wilhelm de Gennin arrived from Moscow, which figured out in the situation and honestly reported Peter the first one about everything. The opposition ended with 6000 rubles from Demidov for false novels.
Monument to Tatishchev and de Gennina in Yekaterinburg (Tatishchev on the right)
Death of Peter
In 1723, Tatishchev was sent to Sweden to collect information about the mining. In addition, he was charged with Masters for Russia and finding places to teach students. And without secret instructions, it was not dealing, he was ordered to collect all the information that Russia can concern. The death of Peter the first found him abroad and seriously knocked out of the rut. He lost a patron, which was reflected on his further career. Trips financing were seriously reduced by him, despite the reports, which indicated that it could acquire for the state. Upon returning home, he pointed out the need for change in the coin case, which determined its near future.
In 1727, he received membership in a coin office led by all mint courts. Three years later, after Peter II, he became her chairman. But soon it was raised about bribery and removed from work. This is associated with the origin of the Biron, which at that time was the favorite of the Empress Anna John. Hands during this period Tatishchev did not lower, continuing to work on the "story of Russian" and other works, studied science.
Recent appointments
The consequence unexpectedly ended in 1734, when he was appointed to his habitual role of the head of all the government of the Mountains of the Urals. For three years, that he spent in this post, there were new plants, several cities and roads. But Biron, who conceived the scope with the privatization of state factories, was assumed that in 1737 Tatishchev was appointed head of the Orenburg Expedition.
Her goal was to establish relations with the peoples of Central Asia in order to join them to Russia. But in such a difficult matter, Vasily Nikitich showed itself only from the best side. He brought order among his subordinates, punishing people who abused their authority. In addition, they were founded by several schools, the hospital and created a large library. But after the dismissal of Baron Shemberg and confrontation with the biron about the mountain grace, a lot of charges fell on it. This led to the removal of Nikitich's Vasily from all cases and take him under house arrest. For some sources, he was concluded in the Peter and Paul Fortress.
The arrest continued until 1740, when after the death of the Empress Anna Ivanovna biron lost his position. Tatishchev was first headed by the Kalmyt Commission, intended to river Kazakh peoples. And then he became the governor of Astrakhan. With all the complexity of tasks, it was extremely poorly supported by finance and troops. This led to a serious deterioration of health. Despite all efforts, the appointment ended as usual. That is, by the court due to the large number of accusations and broadcast from office in 1745.
He spent the last days in his estate, completely devoting himself to science. There is a story that Tatishchev understood in advance that he dies. Two days before his death, he ordered Masters to dig up the grave and asked the priest to come for communion. Then the messenger rushed to him with an excuse for all cases and the Order of Alexander Nevsky, which he returned, saying that he was no longer needed. And only after the rite of communion, saying goodbye to his family, he died. Despite its beauty, this story attributed to the grandchildren of Vasily Nikitich, most likely fiction.
It is impossible to retell the biography of Vasily Tatishchev in one article. A lot of books are written about his life, and his person herself is ambiguous and controversial. It is impossible to hang a label on it, calling just an official or engineer. If you collect everything he did, the list will be very big. It was he who became the first real Russian historian and did not engage in the appointment of the authorities, but at the order of the soul.
Mirage constitution
Ultimately, order, and only order, creates freedom. Disorder creates slavery.
S. Pegi.
Where there is no common interest, there may not be the unity of goals, not to mention the unity of action.
F. Engels.
The Board of Peter II did not promise anything good to the Russian state. It was aware of all the sober-minded figures, even from the camp of the supporters of the young king. Not by chance, after the death of Peter II, even Dolgoruky refused to support the asphar of the former Tsarist Pet of Ivan Alekseevich Dolgoruky with a false testament in favor of his sister - the bride of the king - Ekaterina Alekseevna. The inevitable satellite of absolutism - favoritism - everything brighter has been manifested itself in the last two years of staying on the throne of the prone to the entertainment of the young monarch, awakening the desire to put some limits to monarching whims. Ultimately, everything could suffer from Favoritism, although it was very many and wanted to get into the number of favorites. Therefore, when Peter II died on the eve of his wedding, the question of further reign was spontaneously discussed in different layers of the highest society.
Peter II died on the night of January 19, 1730. In Moscow, at that time were not only the highest government agencies, who moved here a few years ago, but also a large number of provincial nobility gathered for the wedding of the emperor. I immediately crawled rumors that the former autocracy would not be. Perceived these rumors differently. Many were afraid that instead of one bad would appear - the worst. In the circles of a small nobility, there were conversations like the recorded Saxon Messenger. They will not increase our slavery with their oppression. " There were other opinions. Brigadier Kozlov, who came to the midst of events from Moscow to Kazan, told about the expected restriction of autocracy with delight: the Empress will not be able to take a tobacquacker from the treasury, he will not be able to distribute money and volosts, bring to the court of favorites. In Russia, the impressions of Kozlov, there was an opportunity for the "direct rule of the state", direct flow of affairs, which was never ever in Russian history.
In 1730, in Russia there was a very favorable environment for fruitful transformations in the state system. Over the past, not all the pre-revolutionary history of such situations was not. Contrary to the concerns of certain groups of nobility of the suprames (that is, members of the Supreme Secret Council) could not become tyrana if only because the Council was presented very different on the sentiment and political views of the face. Otherwise, I could not. The ancient Spartans and the Kiev residents of the XII century established a peculiar duality, choosing the first two kings, and the second two princes with the sole purpose of crushing and neutralizing the inevitable mercenary aspirations of power. But between the suproopers and gentlemen, as a Polish manner called the nobility at this time, there were valid friction and disagreements, expressed in the distrust of the significant layers of the nobility by the Supreme Secretary Council. In the literature, this distrust is often explained by the knowledge of leading rulers. Soon after the death of Peter II, the two most popular commander of the Russian army was introduced into the Supreme Secret Council: Mikhail Mikhailovich Golitsyn and Vladimir Vasilyevich Dolgoruki. As a result, from seven members of the Council, five were representatives of the two noble surnames. The case, however, was much more complicated.
The friction between the mass of the nobility and the suprames were not referred to because of the meanings of some of the others. Among the opponents of the Verkhovstov were also representatives of nobility - old aristocratic surnames, which are quite capable of competing in meaningfulness with princes of Golitsyn and Dolgoruki. The so-called "Project of thirteen" filed in the Supreme Secret Council along with other noble, provided for even "make a distinction between old and new gentlemen, as practiced in other countries." The main line of divergences of the suprames with the mass of the nobility was about the same as in the spores of Tatishchev with Musion-Pushkin. With all the oscillations, the Supreme Secret Council in 1727-1729 most often took the point of view of Golitsyn, who was looking for solutions to the state of problems on the extension paths (and therefore promoting) trade and entrepreneurship. Indirectly, it affected the interests of the nobility, since the severity of the taxation occurred on the peasants - the object of operation by the nobility. In addition, in search of funds, the government was forced to reduce the salary of the employees-nobles.
A negative role was played in the events and method of actions of the Supreme Secret Council. It should notice that the word "secret", which gives the institution as if an ominous nature, simply reflected the real position: the Council was drawn up from the first civilian officials of the state - real secret advisors. But the wording of the name of the first rank of the rank of ranks was not accidental: at the highest level, the responsibility of all the ranks included the strictest adherence to the secrecy of the discussion of the issues. The Supreme Secretary Council in this respect only followed the tradition that was previously established in the XVII century, and adopted underlined in Petrovsky time.
The restriction of the power of the future monarch was spoken at the night meeting of the Supreme Secret Council on January 19. Although the events found the rulers of surprise, their solutions were not completely ill-imparable. Even the candidates of possible applicants were coordinated pre-at least between Vasily Lukich Dolgoruky and Dmitry Mikhailovich Golitsyn. True, various candidates were floating at the meeting. But Alexei Grigorievich Dolgoruky, who was trying to mention his daughter, engaged with the deceased prince, did not support nobody from his rhodium, and Vladimir Vasilyevich Dolgoruki spoke out against such a sentence and sharp of other members of the Council. Anna Ivanovna's candidacy in the Council called D. M. Golitsyn. But the initiative of its nomination, according to some reports, proceeded from V. L. Dolgoruky. In any case, in the actions of these two leading figures of the Council, the complete unaniments were observed.
Anna Ivanovna's candidacy satisfied the suprames mainly because no party was visible behind her and she still did not show herself as a little active political figure. It seemed that her nomination was acquired by the necessary emphasis in this situation, under the cover of which the suprokes would be able to maintain all the complete power in their hands. It is possible that so would have developed events, if the suproopers did not decide to give a real situation a completely legal, constitutional nature. This is the most recent experience of Sweden.
A status representation in different countries occurs approximately at the same time and under similar circumstances. The royal power, without having a bureaucratic apparatus (and funds for its content), was forced to apply for assistance to estates. Representatives of the estates naturally sought to take advantage of the situation to share power with the monarch. In some cases, it was possible for more or less long period, in others - the estate authorities turned out to be an obedient to the gun in the hands of the autocrat. In the XVII century, this struggle is sharpened in Europe everywhere. Fates of Russia and Sweden in this regard are most similar. At the end of the XVII century, absolutism triumphs in Sweden. Ricstag, essentially, is inferior to the whole power to King Carlo Xi. Small nobility and citizens support the king against the aristocracy and major landowners.
The authority of Charles XI is largely connected with its foreign policy successes (especially noticeable against the background of unsuccessful actions of the former regent council). Karl XI died in 1697 left his fifteen-year-old son Carlo XII such a strong royal authority that no one even dreamed of trying to atone. Karl XII turned out to be excellent commander. However, he eventually lost the northern war. To top it all in 1718, he died in Norway. For any state-owned victory system, as it were, the justification of even the most inappropriate for its actions, the defeat, on the contrary, can lead to a crash and what it might still be viable less than forty years ago Ricstag retreated to the background to succeeding absolutism. Now absolutism should have been responsible for defeat. In 1719-1720, decisions on the form of the Board were developed, which approved Ricstag in 1723. The government now belonged to the estates acting through Ricstag. Royal power was significantly limited.
The administrative experience of Sweden was used during Peter. The king, as mentioned, in particular, was interested in the system of organization in Sweden the colleges. Vasily Lukich Dolgoruky back in 1715, being a Russian envoy in Copenhagen, received the prescription to familiarize himself with the staffing of the Danish College: "How many calf is that each position, how many people are in the college of each, why the salary to whom what ranks of themselves." Later, preparing the project of the Board, he used both Swedish experience.
The experience of Sweden undoubtedly helped the suprames in a short time to offer some important establishments. But the matter is not in borrowing, but in the similarity of the fate. In Russia, too, the Zemsky Cathedral, who approved the Code of 1649, did not provide for himself in this legal monument for himself, having transferred the whole full of power to the king.
The estate representative office in Russia has reached the highest development in difficult years of troubled time and in the first decade after election to the royal throne of young Mikhail Romanov. But gradually the role of conspicuous institutions falls. The stormy social shocks of the "rebellious" XVII century forced the tops to reach the strong royal power. With Peter I, autocracy reaches a peculiar vertex. Peter, as it were, expressed that limit that absolutism is able to give. And it turned out that costs were too much.
On the content of "Conditions" - the conditions of the invitation to the royal throne of Anna Ivanovna - the supremes agreed quickly. Anna agreed to recognize "Always established the Supreme Secret Council in eight persons always contain", "Further's integrity and well-being of any state from good tips." On the night of January 19, the Secretary of the Council Stepanov dictated eight points that limit the arbitrariness of the monarch in the distribution of the ranks and complaints, in the imposition of filters and expenses. Dictated more than other Vasily Lukich, and worked out "Chang", that is, appreciated the legal form, Andrei Ivanovich Osterman.
Conditions are only one "constitutional" document of the supremes, and not the most important. This is even compromising their document, as it is about limiting the power of the Empress in favor of only the Supreme Secret Council. It was this document that was to cause anxiety from a significant part of the nobles, including nobility, since nothing was said about their place in the new state system. Meanwhile, the rulers had suggestions and on this. Nobles did not know about them.
Conditions were a document with whom the supremes appealed to Anna. To the nobled "nasnoodia" they were going to go out with a different document, much greater than the size than the condition. This is a "draft form of government." The first point in the project explained that "the Supreme Secretary Council consists for any of the one's own meeting of power, for the best state benefit and management to help their imp. Majesty. As in the previous period in Russia, the restrictions on the occupation of posts were not supposed. "Hope", that is, the vacations were required, the places were to be addressed by the elections from the "first names, from the generals and from the shirt, the people of the faithful and society of people's friendly benevolent, not remembering the ingenians."
A sharp rate for exemption from the Zasil "Inomes", apparently, conducted D. M. Golitsyn. But in the "Project" this line was muffled. The supremes, in particular, were fully recognized full of Osterman, and there is no reason to think that someone intended to eliminate him from the Council. In terms of restrictions for foreigners, the supremes could refer to the relevant experience of Sweden, where at all expertly expected by foreigners any posts. But such a reference was needed only for the formulation of this issue in the presence of Osterman. In Sweden, there was never any foreign domulility. Another thing is Russia. Here, some industries and management units were captured by foreign things.
"Project" provided for a solution and another task, quite disturbing the nobility: from one name to the Council could not include no more than two people, "so that there is no one to take the forces to themselves." This proposal meant the removal of one of the long-term. Apparently, Alexey Grigorievich should have to withdraw, since Field Marshal Vladimir Vasilyevich had just been specifically introduced, and Vasily Lukich was one of the co-authors of the project.
The choice of candidates for "evolved" places should have been carried out by members of the Supreme Secret Council together with the Senate. When considering cases, the Council was to be guided by the principle that "no person manage the law, but the law manages persons, and do not argue about the names below what hazards, tookmo look for a total crawler without any passion." To resolve any "new and important state case", a meeting of the Council was to be invited "for the Council and reasoning" Senate, General Senthest, college members and a noble hatch.
The "project" as a whole preserved the structure of power, which has developed in the last years of the Board of Peter I, including the table of ranks approved in 1722. "For the auxiliary" Supreme Secretary Council remained the Senate. The question of the number was supposed to be solved additionally, taking into account the wishes of the "society". The Senate and the College should have been gaining "from the general and noble gentleman."
The main addressee of the project was a nobility that all the privileges are scattered. The nobles were released from the service in the "bottom and lower ranks", for them it was envisaged to create "special cadettsy companies, which are determined by training directly into the oborce (that is, higher) Africa." It was assumed that "all the gentlemen containable to be as in the protections of European states in proper respect." In other words, the nobility was promised to promise everything that it demanded in their petitions or private conversations. But nobles did not know anything about it: the project announced before the arrival of the empress.
Beach of time was more than once mentioned contradiction: the old feeding system as if canceled, but the salary is not regularly paid. The suproopers promise to strictly follow the timely payment of a salary, and also to increase the rates in the ranks "by merit and in dignity, and not by passions and not in the world." The wish is expressed "about the soldiers and about the matroshech to look diligently as over the children's children, in order not to have in vain work, and before offensive.
Mercury was given only one, but a very important point. The principle of the monopoly was resolutely rejected: "In the auction, there should be no goods to give them anyone in some arms and the submatures should relieve them." Also, also "we will protect all the ranks in the merchants not intercepts." In the conditions of the feudal state, the fence of merchants from possible intervention on the part of the authorities or nobility is the most advanced development of trade and industry. At this point, the reflection of the policy that Golitsyn was trying to conduct in practice in 1727-1729, heading the Commerce-Collegium.
Promise sounded enough: "For the peasants with submatha, how much can be stuffed, and state excessive costs will dissolve." It was about the reduction of peasants to reduce government spending. But the experience of previous years has shown that with "reduction of expenses" there was always the case in the best way, although something in this direction was still done.
The political sense had a prescription: the government "to be in Moscow certainly, and not tolerate anywhere." True, it was explained by this need to avoid "state unnecessary losses" and "to correct the entire society of their houses and villages." Indeed, the maintenance of the courtyard and institutions did nothing more expensive in St. Petersburg than in Moscow. But the point was not so much in this, how much is that Moscow personified actually Russia and her tradition, while Petersburg was exactly the "window to Europe", and it turned out as it were in the opposite direction from Russia.
The "draft form of government" was the result of mutual concessions of members of the Supreme Secret Council. In this form, he did not fully reflect the views of D. M. Golitsyn, nor conviction of V. L. Dolgoruky. Golitsyn had a more bold project of political transformations, which envisaged a significant increase in the role of the third estate. According to Golitsyn, in addition to the Supreme Secret Council, three meetings were established: Senate, the Shantehtsky Chamber, the House of Urban Representatives. The Senate consisted of thirty-six people was to consider cases submitted to the Council. The Shuttle Chamber of two hundred people was designed to protect the rights of this estate from possible encroachments on the part of the Supreme Secret Council. The Chamber of Urban Representatives had to observe the interests of the third estate and establish trade affairs.
It was in the Golitsynsk project that the Swedish Constitution was also taken into account with the greatest completeness, and the Russian Entry Practice of the Epoch of Her Highest Lift. Golitsyn significantly further his colleagues was ready to meet the wishes of merchants and citizens. Creating closed texts in this case should have limited further expansion of serfdom. And it is clear that this project was not even submitted to the discussion. It was too clear that he would not satisfy the nobility, without which any supper suggestions were doomed to failure.
The supremes envisaged a certain procedure for discussing projects on the way to turn them into legislative acts. This goal was a special document called "ways, which, as seen, is decent, it is possible to compose more and harder and approved the well-known and important and useful to all people and the state." The first point of the document was suggested, "so that all the Great-Russian people of the shittyness, turn off the inken ... not a Greek law and whose grandfathers did not spend their grandfathers, would agree for themselves and for their missing unanimously together so that no one, no one and nothing from that consent Divided by any merit nor the rank, nor old age, and so that there was one voice. " Consequently, the equality of all nobles, regardless of their personal merit and the knowledge of the kind, as well as the provisions on the service stairs.
"The unanimous consent" it was necessary to elect "use of the gentry of the suitable and faithful fatherland from twenty to thirty people," and these elected should be prepare written projects, "that they may be seized to fly away." Meetings are chaired by two elected persons who themselves do not have the right to vote, but should maintain order, to take passion during the meetings. If there were questions regarding other classes, elected from these classes were invited to discuss. It was stipulated, "so that elected from any rank had their choice," that is, the elections are carried out on top, on the part of the authorities, but within the framework of class organizations.
Prepare a collective conclusion, elected from the nobles had to submit it to the Senate "and advise him to advise him." Then everyone together is sent to the Supreme Secret Council. "And as elected, Senate and the Supreme Council about what business is converted, and then send several words to her. Majesty and ask, to confirm" (that is, approved).
The proposed projects could completely change the political face of Russia and significantly affect its further social development. Even restriction of the circle of full-fledged citizens in the political relationship only with a gentleman in these conditions was a big step forward. In addition, at least in a deaf form, it was also mentioned about the rights of other classes (of course, not counting the fortress peasants), the cases of which were to be resolved with their full participation. In the last reservation, perhaps, the influence of the Golitsyn project of creating classroom chambers affects. The logic of further development would inevitably lend to a gradual strengthening of the role of the third class, as follows how it was in Sweden of this time. Aristocracy in Sweden more than in Russia, sich in its origin. But the third estibility due to the presence of significant capital confidently took into their own areas those areas that gave most profits.
In 1730, there was no inevitable doomed of constitutional undertakings. And in any case, never in Russia, up to 1905, there were no such favorable conditions for the transition to the constitutional monarchy. Orthodox miscalculations were rather tactical than political character. Hardly, no most of all the suproopers led the "mystery" of their meetings, "mystery", which each member of the Council solemnly swore to keep independently of any turning of events. Vasily Lukich, returning from Mitava after signing Anna Ivanovna Condiza, dislarously noticed that it was necessary "although they briefly mention what things to them (that is, elected from the nobles) will be believed ... so that the people learned that the people know that the benefits of the folk care want to start ". The supremes either failed, or did not have time to implement this proposal.
Developing the projects of expanding the political role of the nobility, the supremes still did not trust the nobility. Therefore, they sought to put it before accomplished by the fact. The introduction of the Council of the two most popular Feldmarshals should have been dirty troubled, albeit the apolitical guard. Feldmarshals could easily find a sufficient number of army regiments, ready to respond to their appeal. But the rulers tried to present the condition and other acts of expression of the will of the Empress itself. It was a big and unjustified risk. Such a way promised success only if the empress itself was a member of the conspiracy. But to count on it, of course, did not have to. It was difficult to hope for the fact that it would be possible to reliably protect the empress from the outside world. Even the intention of the Verkhovkov Anna learned before their opponents than themselves.
Holding to Anna Ivanovna, the supremes themselves knitted their hands. They could now not contact the nobility. The situation was especially aggravated after on February 2 at the meeting of the highest ranks of the state, signed by Anna Ivanovna Condition were proclaimed. True, the Supreme Secret Council suggested that the first five ranks of serving officials and the titled nobility submit their projects. But the approval was automatically transferred to the office of the Empress, which soon had to arrive in Moscow. The most important for the nobility of the Council's documents to the attention of the nobility was never brought and, apparently, could be made public only after approval by their empress.
Thus, striving for the restriction of the monarchy in the interests of the nobility, the supremes did not believe themselves in the civilian preparedness of the Russian gentlement, in its political activity and self-awareness. Therefore, the rulers and sought to impose him civil rights and constitutional consciousness from above, imperial will.
Noble projects that have arisen independently of the rulers or on their proposal were significantly poorer the project of the supremes. The Supreme Secretary Council received several such projects, and most of them were outlined only the next wishes of the nobility, while the issues of the general political device were almost not affected. Almost all projects were the question of the need to expand the composition of the Supreme Council or the transfer of its functions of the Senate. In the project I. A. Musina Pushkin, the meaning of the trodovitic aristocracy was very sharply emphasized. "Family" should have belonging to half of the places and in the Supreme Secret Council, and in the Senate, and even the general gelatinity rank. The difference between the old and new gentlement, as noted, was carried out in the draft thirteen. In this project, it was, in particular, the situation that "for crafts and other low positions do not use the gentry."
However, if the crown projects were poor, the disputes in the noble meetings gave birth and rather far-reaching offers. One of the most active participants in these disputes was Vasily Nikitich Tatishchev, who had the greatest knowledge, and the breadth of judgment compared to their colleagues.
In the events of 1730, Golitsyn and Tatishchev found themselves in different camps. And it's not so much in ideological discrepancies, as in the peculiarities of political scenario. At the end of the 20s, the accusations of Feofan Prokopovich were repeatedly initiated, and the prosecutors stood representatives of the old prince's names, Petrovsky Cabinet-Secretary A. Makarov and others. Prokopovich annoyed many Russians with a negative attitude towards Russian antiquity, peculiar cosmopolitanism, indifference to the prestige of the country in the European arena. But out loud, such things usually did not say. Therefore, it appeared the accusation of "non-melting", precisely in the inclination to Lutheranism. The grounds for this were. Surrounded by Peter there was a lot of Lutheran. In Lutheranka, he was married and one of the rulers, Gabril Golovkin, with the result that in the family his children were brought up in Lutheran spirit. Tatishcheva would have risen to blame in disrespect for Russian history. But the "non-melting", the truth is different, he had much more than at Prokopovich, and Prokopovich did not fail to demonstrate it in public, marked with some very free view of Tatishchev.
About the clouds that thickened above Tatishchev, and in the summer of 1728 reported Brunchweig Messenger Baron von Kramm. Kram is characterized by Tatishchev as one of the very reasonable people, a superbly knowledgeable German language and possessing large knowledge in the field of mountain and mintage, but for some reason, who has fallen into disrepair to Alexey Grigorievich Dolgorukhu. Under the guise of the inspection of mining enterprises, Dolgoruki intended to send it to Siberia. Later in a letter to I. A. Cherkasov, Tatishchev reminded that the intention of the Dolgoruki, who directly threatened him "Hanging and Flaby".
In Antioch Kantemir, life adversity focused on the identity of Dmitry Golitsyn. Antioch's older brother Konstantin married the daughter of Golitsyn and not without the help of the test managed to take advantage of the law on the union, having received all the ownership of the Father. Antihaus turned out to be deprived of sustainable material support. To a large extent, this circumstance and attached his work a pessimistic color.
By the end of the 20s, Tatishchev came closed with Kantemir and Prokopovich a certain similarity of fate and some of their views. Often they had the same enemies. But he could not accept the unrestrained apologetics of the autocracy, with which Prokopovich and Kantemir were performed. Ultimately, he was among those whom Prokopovich also expose sharp criticism as "rebellious" rivals of the suprames in the rule of power.
"Rebel" gathered in different homes where heated spores were conducted. The most crowded gatherings were observed at A. M. Cherkassky, Vasily Novosiltsheva, Prince Ivan Baryatinsky. The creature of the disputes of Tatishchev outlined later in the note "Arbitrary and consonant saying and the opinion of the gathered" State of the Russian government ". According to the observation of Plekhanov, "Tatishchev himself did not know what, in fact, he wanted: he defended in the theory of autocracy, writes a constitutional project" and then then persuades constitutionalists to agree with the monarchists, then ready to read before Anna Ivanovna Constitutional Bealing Nobility. M. N. Pokrovsky saw even the inability to "distinguish the constitutional monarchy from Absolute" in these fluctuations. But the document on which is usually judged about the views of Tatishchev, it is still a "consonant alignment", that is, the collective opinion of a certain group of nobility. Tatishchev hesibly hesitated and subjectively - the ideal form of government for Russia did not think over them earlier - and objectively, as a member of a certain public layer. It is known that already on January 23, that is, just a few days after Peter II death, Tatishchev wanted and "read some of whom" materials related to the Swedish form of government, and promised to "willingly pay" the Swedish ambassador for finding various rictague decrees. He was obviously among the pioneers of constitutionalism, at least as long as (of course, unexpectedly) did not determine the choice of the Humanov: Anna Ivanovna, with the birth of which his "service" at the court had once begun.
To properly understand the actual views of Tatishchev, another circumstance should also be taken into account, which recently drew attention to the Soviet historian G. A. Protasov. The note was drawn up after events, when autocracy triumphed and Tatishchev, perhaps, had to be met in front of someone from Anna's environments. Thus, on a historical certificate, which sums up to the merits, the influence of one of the sermons of Feofan Prokopovich, recorded in 1734, affects. Prokopovich gave a peculiar scheme of Russian history, which followed that Russia was always strengthened by autocracy and descended because of his weakening.
1734, perhaps, was the time when the "acquittal" document was needed from Tatishcheva, which will be discussed below. Later, in 1743, he will send this document along with others to the Government Senate, which will cause an emergency irritation of his high members, many of which themselves were in one degree or another participants in the events of 1730. And shortly before death, at the request of Schumacher, he sent copies of them to the Academy of Sciences, thanks to which they came to our time.
The story of the note also explains its complex structure, and internal contradictions, and some discrepancy with genuine noble projects, preserved in the archives. Tatishchev, as it were, connects his arguments with the actual course of events and projects to be discussed. It also has something that really offered during the hot disputes, and the fact that he guided and explained already in rear.
The note, as noted, opens the extensive historical part. Tatishchev condemns the supremes for violation of the traditional order of the election of the monarch in case of the restraint of the dynasty. He believes that there were previously three elections: Boris Godunova, Vasily Shui and Mikhail Romanova. Two of them cannot serve as an example: "chose not ordinary: in the first there was a coercion, in the second cunning." "And according to the law, it explains Tatishchev, - the election must be the consent of all subjects, some personally, others through the attorneys, as such an order in many states approved."
"Natural Law" and "Natural Law" - theory, nascent in Europe in the context of the formation of bourgeois protected. With the greatest full understanding of their Tatishchev expressed in the "conversation ...". Here, it concerns the political partition of natural theories, according to which the nature of the person determined the state structure: individual individuals through the "public contract" were connected to a single organism.
In the theories of the "Public Agreement", after Aristotle, three forms of reign were usually considered: monarchy, aristocracy, democracy. But if, for example, Feofan Prokopovich decisively and unequivocally solved the issue in favor of an unlimited monarchy, then the reasoning of Tatishchev is much less definitely. Tatishchev notes the need to take into account the position of a country: "Each area elects, despite the position of the place, the space of ownership, and not every everywhere, it can be useful."
It is noteworthy that the ideal form of the Board of Tatishchev considered democracy. But he believed that she was realized only "in single hail or very close areas, where all the owners of the houses could soon be possible ... And in the Great Area is already very uncomfortable." Democracy thinks Tatishchev as an opportunity to discuss all the issues with the general meeting of citizens. Representative democracy, he unites with the aristocratic form of government. This contacted, of course, is not from the fact that he did not realize the difference between representative democracy and the real aristocracy, characteristic of at least this time for Sweden. Just a representative democracy in his understanding in practice could be feasible in the form of an aristocracy.
The term "aristocracy" of Tatishchev himself explains the refinement: "or the elected government." The "elected" in this case also has a two-way character: enjoying the right to position or chosen to the post. In other words, the principles of election could be different. But in the event that the election was "nationwide", it would be a "aristocracy", "Favorites" by the Board.
Representative (aristocratic) rule is inferior to "democratic", but it is still better than the monarchical. Unfortunately, it is also not possible everywhere. It applies only "in the areas, although from the units of civilians consisting, but from the attacks of the enemy safe, somehow on the islands and so on., And especially if the people are enlightened by teachings and the laws to keep without coercion goes, - Tamo is so ultra-obdunce and cruel fear Required. "
This recognizes the unconditional preference of the representative form of the Board for Scandinavia, England and some other states, in the conditions of the XVIII century, quite reliably protected from external threat. This form would be desirable for other states, if the population is quite enlightened, accustomed to follow the laws without constant reminder and coercion. Like Artemia Petrovich Volynsky, Tatishchev in Russia did not see this last condition. Lack of enlightenment in the presence of a constant external threat, according to Tatishchev, did not leave a choice. Nothing good in its essence does not contain a monarchy. It carries with me only "cruel fear." But the geographical and political conditions of Russia obliges to put up with it as with a relatively smaller evil.
Tatishchev's considerations are obviously not devoid of grounds. Later, Engels is also the presence or lack of royal power in the countries of medieval Europe, it has been addressed mainly from foreign policy circumstances. In Germany, for example, it was not a strong centralized state precisely because there was no need for this because it turned out to be "delivered for a long time from invasions." (Marx K., Engels F. Ot., Vol. 21, p. 418.) K. Marx also tied the "centralized despotism" in Russia with the terms of its internal social system, "extensive stretch of territory" and "The political destinies, experienced by Russia since the time of the Mongolian invasion." (Ibid, t. 19, p. 405-406.)
"The Great and Parent States, for many neighbors of enviable", according to Tatishchev, cannot resist when the democratic or aristocratic form of the board, "there isctive where the people displeased with the teachings, and for fear, and not from the harm, or knowledge of benefit and harm, law Store. " For such states, "not otherwise, as self-definition is needed." Political everyday life, Tatishchev believed, gave examples of successful action of any of these systems. "Holland, Switzerland, Genoa, and so on. A pretty democracy is pretty and called the republic." The aristocratic form has been successfully implemented in Venice. The German Empire and Poland are managed by monarchs along with aristocracy. "England and Sweden from all three consist, Yako in England, the Lower Parliament or the Camera, in Sweden the Seimas - represent common and the Upper Parliament, and in Sweden Senate - Aristocracy."
The dependence of the forms of the Board on the external circumstances of Tatishchev confirms both examples from the World History. So, "Rome, before the emperors, ruled an aristocracy and democracy, and in the case of a hard war, the dictator was elected and gave him a complete one-chief." "In hard", Holland and England are resorted to similar measures. "From this we see," concludes Tatishchev - that since ancient times, the approved republics in cases of dangerous and difficult monarchy are introduced, although on time. "
Conditions of Russia Tatishchev puts in one row with France, Spain, Turkey, Persia, India and China, which "Jaco great states cannot otherwise rule as self-balance."
The feasibility for Russia, the autocracy of Tatishchev confirms its historical experience. In this regard, he gives his first canvas of Russian history, starting it from the Scythians that have already been "self-deprecatory sovereigns." Then the period of "one-chief" is determined by the time from Rurik to Mstislav the Great (son of Vladimir Monomakh), that is, from the second half of the 9th century to 1132. As a result, for 250 years, "Our state has spread everywhere."
Feudal fragmentation led to the fact that the Tatars captured the power over Russian lands, and some of the ownership of Rus were under the rule of Lithuania. Only Ivan III "Paki the monarchy set up, and, intension, not toocco, the power of Tatarskaya overthrew, but many lands they and Lithuania, OVO himself, OVO Son, returned. And so the state of his own honor and security acquired, which went on to the death of Godunov ".
Tatishchev's ruin of the Tatishchev explains that Vasily Shuisky was forced to give Boyars "the record that all the power, at the sovereign, was kidnapped by himself, like now." As a result, the Swedes and Poles "Many ancient Russian limits rejected and mastered." True, Mikhail Romanova's accession was somewhat shed out of this scheme. Although his "election was decently nationwide, but with such a record, through which he could not do anything, but I was glad to rest." The restriction of autocracy in this case seems to be satisfied with the more the king itself. And Tatishchev has no reason to consider this restriction inappropriate.
Alexey Mikhailovich Tatishchev's recovery by Alexei Mikhailovich, explains what the king was able to manage the army during the Russian-Polish war. He believed that it was thanks to this who were won the victory in the war and they would be even big if it were not for the opposition of the "Popy Nikon". The celebration of self-balance and the corresponding successes in Peter Great "All light can witness."
Apparently, something similar Tatishchev also expressed in the discussions of January - February 1730. But the opinions of the opposite were put forward in the disputes: "the one-chased government is very hard," since "a single person is not safe to give the power over all people." The danger threatens and because the king, "as if wise, fair, meek, and was ditched, it could not be sufficient and could not be in everything." In the case, if the monarch "passions will give their will", then innocents suffer from violence. Another threat comes from the fact that the name of the monarch is managed by temporarys, and the temporary "of envy" can rage even more, "there is nothing to do with a coherent or ingenic, then the Napa is notable and deserving the state hates, drives and robs, and he collects insatiable estates." Finally, the third - "fictional fierce king John Vasilyevich the secret office" (that is, the Preobrazhensky order of the bearers), which is posted in the face of other peoples and is destroyed for the state.
Tatishchev considers all considerations expressed solid. But, in his opinion, they do not overlap the positive role of the monarchy for countries such as Russia. It comes from the fact that the monarch "does not have the reason for the ruin of the dedication of the mind to use his use, but one wants to keep and multiply for his children in good order." Therefore, the sovereign is interested in the selection of advisers "from people of prudent, skillful and diligent". But against the argument on the danger of the monarch of the monarch, which "neither the benefit itself does not understand, nor the Council of Wise does not accept and produces the harm", the Tatishchev does not have objections. Having left the reliable soil of the "natural law", Tatishchev is forced to hope for humility: since the possibilities of the acceleration of an inconspicuous monarch cannot prevent, it remains to "take for God's punishment." The alleged interlocutors of Tatishchev teased with the comparison with a very frequent household picture: if one gentry "madly" ruins his house, "for the whole shit of the will in the rule, at the same time, put it, leading that no one would approve." The Republican self-consciousness of the interlocutors of Tatishchev, of course, did not apply to the serf peasantry. But his argument could be rotated in the opposite direction: not only an absolute monarchy, but and a serfdom, is unreasonable.
Recognizes Tatishchev and the danger of tempors: "From these sometimes a lot of bad things tolerate." Great harm caused Russia "frantic temporarys". Skurats and Basmanov under Ivan Grozny, Miloslavsky at Fyodor Alekseevich, Menshikov and Tolstoy in recent times. But they, as it were, are balable "prudent and faithful": Mstislavsky in Grozny, Morozov and Streshnev at Alexei Mikhailovich, cunning and languages \u200b\u200bnear Fedor Alekseevich, Golitsyn in Sofia. These tempors "Thanksgiving eternal deserve, although some of the hatred of others in unfortunate life graduated." In the republics, the situation with tempors is also no better and can become even more dangerous than in monarchies.
The secret office of the state, of course, does not paint. But the matter, it believed Tatishchev, nonsense, because this appeared in the Roman Emperor August or Tiberius. She is even, "if the tokmo man teaches piously, nor is not harmful, and malicious and wicked, unhappy topics enjoyed, they ourselves disappear." The case, therefore, is only the one who seeks the secret office. Tatishchev, however, does not clarify how to prevent the possibility of instructions to "malicious and wicked".
By giving such a theoretical certificate about the feasibility of autocracy in Russia, Tatishchev then moves to the "true". And it turns out that he has considerations about ways of restriction of autocratic arbitrariness. Tatishchev emphasizes that no one objects against the candidature of the Verkhovnikov and that the question of the ways of election of the monarch can only apply to the future. Tatishchev was also satisfied with the "wisdom, adorption and decent government in Kurlendia", shown by Anna Ivanovna. But he invites the actual restriction of her autocracy, although she climbs this proposal in a very intricate form: Empress "As there is a female person, to so many works are inconvenient, it does not get the knowledge of the laws of laws, for the time, the Music Musk The table gives, needs something to help her majesty again establish. "
To help the Women's Person, it was proposed to unite the Supreme Secret Council and the Senate, bringing them to 21 people who would carry the service in three shifts of seven people. "Affairs of internal economy" should have been "another government." It was elected in the number of one hundred people and also participated in the managing shifts along the third years of the year, in order not to launch their own defenders. Three times a year or for emergency circumstances, all the "hundred people" go to the meeting. The "General Meeting" should not continue "more than a month."
The highest posts are elected for life. But the election to the "fallen" places exercised by both governments provided for the nomination of several candidates and holding two tours of the vote: first the three candidates are selected, and then one, most worthy. Voting must be secret. "Through this way," said Tatishchev, "it is possible in all the reins of people worthy to have, despite High-Rooms, in which there are many unfounded in the ranks." In the event that such a way, the Empress does not like it, Tatishchev is ready to give way to: Allow Empress to choose from three pre-selected candidates alone.
Not inclined Tatishchev to give to the discretion of the monarch and legislative power, although again the restriction of autocracy is considered as aid. Tatishchev raises the question: what is the task of the sovereign? And answers: in "total benefits and justice." The Empress itself, of course, will not compose laws. She takes it to someone to someone. And here it is the "danger of considerable, so that who in whims of the obscene and the rightness of the disagreeless or fall of harmful, did not contribute." Even "Peter the Great, although the wise sovereign was, but in his law a lot watched that it was necessary to change." Therefore, he ordered "all-off, consider comprehended and again." In order to prevent disorder in the legislation, "it is better to consider the elastication, rather than making it to change that the monarch does not agree with the secret of the monarch. The unprotected legislation, therefore, falls into the monarch, and so that avoiding this, the monarch must be more prudent.
Since one person is impossible to compose any successful law, it is necessary to attract a fairly wide range of state leaders to its discussion. Previously, it should be discussed in the colleges, then in the "sending government". The Empress will continue to approve a carefully thought out bill.
The secret office of Tatishchev leaves. But "look at justice" should two people allocated by the Senate. Thus, the most odious monarchy body should be neutralized, with the help of which the autocrats were painted with their personal opponents.
In the Tatischev project, elected bodies are compiled from the nobility. The promoters of the Petrovsk epoch, who received the nobility with the achievement of the relevant rank of the rank of ranks, were recorded in a "special book." True, the recording was made only in order for the "genuine gentlemanship to be known." Directly on the economic and political position of the new nobility, such a division did not affect. But it was still a concession of the "breed" principle. It was unclear only if the attitude to the question of Tatishcheva himself reflected this position or he was inferior to the insistence of his colleagues, on behalf of whom he played in this case.
Like other noble projects, Tatischevsky assumed the discovery for the nobles of special schools in order to directly produce them into officers. The service has so far been lifelong. The project assumed enrollment in service from eighteen years and restriction of its twenty years.
It is not very definitely about merchandise: "Coliko can be fired from standing and get rid of the otisnation, but to submit a way to reproduction of manuff and trading." Given that the project was discussed in large meetings, it is possible to understand such an uncertain formula "Coliko can". The nobility as a whole went towards mercy only to the other, until their immediate interests suffered.
The counter considerations about the feasibility of the republic reproduced by Tatishchev are very curious. It is difficult to even imagine who could perform at this time with republican ideas. In any case, none of the noble projects there is no hint of such far-reaching thoughts. The question of the organization of the highest power in them was not even considered: the nobles equally agreed with the autocracy, and with its limitation. But Tatishchev has these questions to get up again and again, and it is possible that he behaved with himself with himself, maybe using the responses of Feofan Prokopovich to his own doubts.
In the Supreme Secret Council, a different text of the project was served from the most significant group of the nobility than the one that Tatishchev outlined by memory. So, in addition, in addition to the "Elimian Government" from 21 people, the Senate continued in the amount of 11 people, and one hundred people participated in the elections of the highest state posts. This document, together with copies, signed over three hundred people, including A. M. Cherkasi, Ivan Plescheev, Plato Musin-Pushkin, A. K. Zybin. Among the signatories were Tatishchev.
The rulers were not at all intended to persist on the number of "Elimian Government", as follows about his name. They were ready to replenish the number of council members to twelve people and more, that is, to practically expand him at the expense of the Senate, which appeared in 1730, eight members, or at the expense of the newly elected. But now they already considered themselves the associated offers of the meeting on February 2. For the final decision of the issues affected in the noble projects, they were again intended to obtain the sanction of the Empress and to declare agreement with the main wishes of the nobles. Not knowing and, apparently, without guessing this, nobles began to be impatient and anxiety. It became for them that the supremes want to solve important questions for their back. Under these conditions, they achieve admission to the Empress.
While Anna Ivanovna moved with his tuple from Mitava towards Moscow, self-adjusting adherents held in the shadows and were concealed. The autocratic party in Moscow was not at all omnipotent. But as the empress approaches and establishing connections, the monarchists have increasingly raised their heads. At the head of the autocratic party, there were three rubbing ingenians: Andrei Ivanovich Osterman, Feofan Prokopovich and Antioch Kantemir.
In essence, a foreigner in Russia, if he sought to power, there was no choice. "The Russian nobles serve as the state, German - we," so the century later appreciated the situation Nicholas I, cynically recognizing the incomprehension of the interests of autocracy with the state, and the purely mercenary nature of the mutual love of self-adjustments with ingeneses. Osterman, who dictated "County" during the compilation of the Conditions, was not hoping, of course, to resist on the surface if the Shuthek Republic was suddenly established in Russia. From the hands of Peter received such a high position and Feofan Prokopovich - the author of the treatise in defense of unlimited autocracy. Cantemir with the case and himself could be a monarch at the homeland of his father.
For self-adjustment stood and the promoters of Peter, who feared for not always righteous by the mined elevation. There were also offended. The son-in-law Golovna Yaguzhinsky on the night of January 19, shouted about the need for "will add to himself." But many of the rulers could not hide contempt for this hypocritical and stoley jack. And Yaguzhinsky is in a hurry to warn Anna about the plans of the rulers.
The side of the autocracy held the former Chancellor Golovkin. Golovkin and Osterman, now and then affected patients. When D. M. Golitsyn decided to visit the "patient" of Osterman, it turned out that he was actor than ever.
The cooperation of Golitsyn and Dolgoruky was rather difficult. Two titled clans trusted little to each other. Genuine interest in the success of the case, apparently showed only D. M. Golitsyn and V. L. Dolgoruky. Both sought and somehow expand the circle of adherents of the Constitutional Party. But Golitsyn, apparently, was simply late. To join the agreement with the environment of A. M. Cherkassky, he or did not have time, or could not be due to the opposition of other members of the Council. In any case, the appeal to Anna Ivanovna followed from this group of nobles, and they complained about the reluctance of the Supreme Secret Council to consider their petition.
A. M. Cherkassky did not differ in either a state mind nor hardness of character nor clarity of political goals. But on his side there were a rich pedigree and no less rich defenders than he attracted representatives of the nobility, usually also titled and also politically lacking.
On the eve of the arrival of Anna Ivanovna, excitation in Moscow reached the highest point. Monarchists are now going to different homes more or less openly. On February 23, a meeting was held in the house of General Lieutenant Baryatinsky. At this meeting, the supremes were again condemned for not wanting to satisfy the requirements of the nobility. I ignored convinced that it would be able to do it only autocracy. Tatishchev was entrusted with the opinion of the Baryatinsky group to bring to the attention of General Directorate and the Higher Nobility, which gathered at Cherkasy. As a result, a joint chamber was developed, written to Kantemir. Praskovya Yurievna Saltykov, the wife of the cousin of Anna - the seeds of Andreevich Saltykov and the sister of Golovkina, was informed about it. Praskovya participated in different meetings and triggered everything to the attention of the empress.
Tatishchev, apparently, several one-sidedly outlined the essence of multiple noble meetings on February 23 and 24. Yes, and his own position did not differ in the sequence. There is an indication that he encouraged him to write a project S. A. Saltykov. Saltykov and his spouse resolutely held the lines for restoring autocracy, although he was among the signatories of the Tatischev project. Tatishchev willingly discussed controversial issues with monarchists and constitutionalists. This kind of oscillation is characteristic of many other disadvantages of the nobility. Very often in the same family, father and son or two brothers turned out in different companies: just in case, whose will take.
On February 25, a group of nobles, including Cherkasky, who just stuck to them, Field Marshal Trubetskoy and Tatishchev, managed to penetrate the palace. Trubetskaya as the elder in rank was supposed to read the petition. But since he stuttering, he read it expressively and loudly, Tatishchev.
The petition, read by Tatishchev, did not indicate the desire of the nobility to return to the autocratic form of the Board. It expressed gratitude for the fact that Anna "knew to sign points." "Immortal Thanks" was promised Anna and from the offspring. The nobles did not suit the fact that such a useful undertaking is carried out by the Supreme Secret Council. To dispel "Bulk", the teachers asked for a convening of something like a constituent meeting from generals, officers and gentlemen one or two people from the surname to address the issue of the form of state reign.
Anna was aware of the intention of supporters of restoration autocracy. Among them, she obviously believed Tatishchev. But the text of the petition was so unexpected for her that she was ready to reject him. To sign the petition advised Anna her elder sister Catherine. What she was guided by - difficult to say. Relations between three sisters were far from idyllic. Anna did not love sisters, especially Catherine, which was different and great mind, and more energy than Anna. But Anna was afraid of her and therefore heard. Ekaterina after gap with her husband, the Duke of Mecklenburg, lived in his Izmailovsky Palace. The choice of Anna could not help but take it. Still, she was older, and able to conduct state affairs than Anna. I advise you to sign a new document, she hoped not so much to strengthen the position of Anna during the inevitable after such a turn of the Affiner's case, how much to return to the original overcomes, when and its own name will be among the candidates discussed for the royal table.
No serious "jams", however, did not happen. Guards officers immediately raised the noise and expressed the desire to fold the heads of all "villains" to the legs of the autocratic empress. There was nothing constitutionalists, as joined by another petty, read this time cantemir. In this petition, however, after a request to accept the "autocracy," the wishes put the wishes to allow the nobility to the elections of the highest positions and the form of the government's government for the premiends now to establish. " But the first thesis has already crossed out all the next. Those who hoped to connect autocracy with the principles of representative board and legality could immediately make sure of their hopes. Anna ordered to break the condition in the eyes of the supremes and other senior officials, accusing Vasily Lukich, as if he was deceiving forced her to sign them earlier. There could be no question of anything about the treatment of her side to the noble "nasnoodia".
The political experiment is unique in the history of Russia: a five-time constitutional monarchy period. The delight and the babysitment was now poured by those who, according to Artemia Volynsky, was filled with "cowardice and pussy." Claim the instigators of the opposite to God and the usual current of the work plan of the political reorganization of society. And even Tatishchev in a confused note, seeks to combine constitutional moods with autocracy, proving that for unenmended so far Russia is acceptable exactly that in a decent society it would be necessary to resolutely reject as something inappropriate and unworthy of the natural nature of human. Dogged and dolval. They were ready to get ahead of monarchists with the presentation of Anna full autocracy. And it seems, only Dmitry Golitsyn did not retreat from one day a busy position. "The Day was ready," he said after the events of February 25. - But the guests were unworthy. I know that the trouble would hit my head. Let I suffer for the fatherland. I am old, and death does not scream me. But those who hope Enjoy my sufferings will suffer even more. " It was a prophetic look at the coming bironovshchina.