50 S. Tatishcheff, Alexandre I et Napoléon, Paris, 1894, Alexander to Lobanov, 4/16 June 1807, p. 121.
51 D. N. Shilov, Gosudarstvennye deiateli Rossiiskoi imperii, SPB, 2001, pp. 377–9. Grand Duke Nikolai Mikhailovich, Russkie portrety, SPB, n.d., vol. 4, part 1, no. 62.
52 On Aleksandr Kurakin’s career, see S. N. Shipov and Iu. A. Kuz’min, Chleny gosudarstvennogo soveta Rossiiskoi imperii, SPB, 2007, pp. 412–16. Lobanov’s reports on the initial negotiations are in RS, 98, 1899, pp. 594–5, Lobanov to Alexander, 7/19 June 1807. See also RA, 1, 1868, Kurakin to Empress Marie, 10/22 June 1807, pp. 183–7.
53 It seems that in his initial drafts Tolstoy depicted the Kuragins in more sympathetic terms: K. B. Feuer, Tolstoy and the Genesis of War and Peace, Ithaca, NY, 1976, p. 71. On the ancestry of Lobanov and Kurakin, see N. Ikonnikov, La Noblesse de Russie, 2nd edn., vols. A1–Z2, Paris, 1958–66: vols. H1, pp. 211–16 and I1, pp. 426–31.
54 On Constantine, see E. Karnovich, Tsesarevich Konstantin Pavlovich, SPB, 1899. On Paul, see R. McGrew, Paul I of Russia, Oxford, 1992, and H. Ragsdale (ed.), Paul I: A Reassessment of his Life and Reign, Pittsburgh, 1979.
55 V. I. Genishta and A. T. Borisovich, Istoriia 30-go dragunskago Ingermanlandskago polka 1704–1904, SPB, 1904, pp. 119–21, describes Lieven’s role in preparing the army for the 1805 campaign.
56 Lieven’s personnel record is in RGVIA, Fond 489, Opis 1, Delo 7062, fo. 356: as was true of many officers, he omitted to mention his parents’ property. See his self-appraisal in a letter to his fiancée, Dorothea, who was the god-daughter of the Empress Marie: J. Charmley, The Princess and the Politicians, London, 2005, p. 7.
57 S. W. Jackman (ed.), Romanov Relations, London, 1969, Grand Duchess Anna to Grand Duke Constantine, 2 April 1828, p. 149.
58 See e.g. Tatishcheff, Alexandre, pp. 140, 183, and A. Vandal, Napoléon et Alexandre Premier, 3 vols., Paris, 1891, vol. 1, pp. 61–7. The instructions are in VPR, 1st series, 3, note 414, pp. 754–60.
59 Alexander did relinquish the Ionian Islands and Cattaro, which Russia could in any case never defend once at war with the Ottomans and Britain. It received the more useful Belostok district in return.
60 The treaties of peace and alliance are in VPR, 1st series, vol. 3, nos. 257 and 258, pp. 631 ff.
61 These comments on Alexander’s preferences and perceptions are drawn from the instructions he gave to Kurakin and Lobanov: VPR, 1st series, vol. 3, note 414, pp. 754–60.
62 For a list of regimental artisans, see I. Ul’ianov, Reguliarnaia pekhota 1801–1855, vol. 2, Moscow, 1996, p. 212. On the Church in the army, see L. V. Mel’nikova, Armiia i pravoslavnaia tserkov’ Rossiiskoi imperii v epokhu Napoleonovskikh voin, Moscow, 2007, pp. 45–56, 116–37.
63 The key work on officers’ profiles is Tselerungo, Ofitsery russkoi armii.
64 The information on the Preobrazhenskys comes from: RGVIA, Fond 489, Opis 1, Ed. Khr. 1, fos. 455–560: ‘Formuliarnyi spisok leib gvardii Preobrazhenskago polka, generalam, shtab i ober ofitseram i drugim chinam’, dated 1 Jan. 1808. Only occasionally in the personnel records of line regiments can one spot that officers have neglected to mention serf-owning: see for one example the three Dolzhikov brothers in the Narva Dragoons who had family serfs as orderlies: RGVIA, Fond 489, Opis 1, Ed. Khr. 2457, ‘Spisok o sluzhbe…Narvskago dragunskago polka’, fos. 95 ff. for the list of batmen and lines 6 ff. and 27 ff. for the personnel records of the brothers. It is much easier to spot omissions among the prominent officers of the Preobrazhensky officers, let alone in the generals’ personnel records in Fond 489, Opis 1, Delo 7602.
65 The quote is from Zapiski Sergeia Grigorovicha Volkonskago (dekabrista), SPB, 1902, p. 70. See e.g. L. G. Beskrovnyi (ed.), Dnevnik Aleksandra Chicherina, 1812–1813, Moscow, 1966, for excellent insights into the cultured young Guards officers’ mentality. Two such strikes were in the Semenovskys on the eve of 1812 and in the Guards artillery in January 1814: P. Pototskii, Istoriia gvardeiskoi artillerii, SPB, 1896, pp. 285–6; Dnevnik Pavla Pushchina, Leningrad, 1987, pp. 49–50.
66 On Lazarev, see http:www.svoboda.org/programs. For examples of ex-rankers being censured for poor behaviour after the war, see e.g. the cases of lieutenants Beliankin and Kirsanov of the 45th Jaegers (RGVIA, Fond 489, Opis 1, Delo 1855, fos. 19–20) or of three officers of the Iamburg Lancers (Lt. Krestovskii, Istoriia 14-go Ulanskago Iamburgskago E.I.V. velikoi kniagini Marii Aleksandrovny polka, SPB, 1873, appendices). Of course, many ex-rankers flourished.
67 ‘Imperator Aleksandr I: Ego kharakteristika po sochineniiu N. K. Shil’dera’, RS, 99/3, 1899, pp. 98–114, at p. 99.
68 The catalogue of the excellent recent exhibition at the Hermitage on Alexander contains articles with many insights into his personality: Aleksandr I: ‘Sfinks ne razgadannyi do groba’, SPB, 2005.
69 Quoted in N. Shil’der, Imperator Aleksandr pervyi: Ego zhizn’ i tsarstvovanie, 4 vols., SPB, 1897, vol. 3, a letter to Alexander from Professor Parrot, p. 489.
70 D. V. Solov’eva (ed.), Graf Zhozef de Mestr: Peterburgskie pis’ma, SPB, 1995, no. 72, de Maistre to de Rossi, 20 Jan./1 Feb. 1808, p. 99.
71 There is a dearth of work on provincial society and administration under Alexander. The reign of Catherine II and the period from the 1861 Emancipation to 1917 are much better covered. For a good overview of local administration, see Janet Hartley, ‘Provincial and Local Government’, in Lieven (ed.), Cambridge History of Russia, vol. 2, pp. 446–67.
72 The book which best expresses Alexander’s dilemmas is S. V. Mironenko, Samoderzhavie i reformy: Politicheskaia bor’ba v Rossii v nachale XIX v., Moscow, 1989.
73 Metternich to Hardenberg, 5 Oct. 1812, in W. Oncken, Österreich und Preussen in Befreiungskriege, Berlin, 1878, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 378–80.
74 RD, 5, no. 520, Caulaincourt to Champagny, 19 Sept. 1810, pp. 138–40.
Chapter 3: The Russo-French Alliance
1 N. F. Dubrovin, ‘Russkaia zhizn’ v nachale XIX v.’, RS, 29/96, 1898, pp. 481–516.
2 RD, 4, no. 334, Caulaincourt to Champagny, 3 Oct. 1809, pp. 110–16.
3 e.g. RD, 1, no. 52, Caulaincourt to Champagny, 25 Feb. 1808, pp. 161–74; 2, no. 165, Caulaincourt to Napoleon, 8 Sept. 1808, pp. 344–6; 3, no. 187, Caulaincourt to Champagny, 15 Jan. 1809, pp. 27–32.
4 Zapiski Sergeia Grigorovicha Volkonskago (dekabrista), SPB, 1902, pp. 60–62.
5 A. Vandal, Napoléon et Alexandre Premier, 3 vols., Paris, 1891, vol. 1, pp. 196–7. SIRIO, 89, 1893, no. 15, Tolstoy to Rumiantsev, 26 Oct./7 Nov. 1807, pp. 183–5; no. 86, Tolstoy to Alexander, Dec. 1807, pp. 312–13; no. 111, Tolstoy to Rumiantsev, 25 April/7 May 1808, pp. 519–27.
6 Correspondance de l’Empereur Alexandre, no. 12, Catherine to Alexander, 25 June 1807, pp. 18–19. On the French émigrés in Russia, see André Ratchinski, Napoléon et Alexandre Ier, Paris, 2002.
7 VPR, 4, no. 219, Stroganov to Alexander, 1/13 Feb. 1809, pp. 490–91.
8 On Mordvinov, see e.g. AGM, 4, pp. xliv–xlv: see in particular his memorandum on the Continental System dated 25 Sept. 1811 (OS), pp. 479–86. For Gurev’s statement, see C. F. Adams (ed.), John Quincy Adams in Russia, New York, 1970, p. 277. Since official policy on the surface remained committed to the French alliance until the moment Napoleon crossed the border, diplomats usually camouflaged this view. The main but by no means only exception was Petr Tolstoy, who was already arguing for rapprochement with Britain as early as the summer of 1808. See e.g. SIRIO, 89, 1893, no. 111, Tolstoy to Rumiantsev, 25 April/7 May 1808, pp. 519–27; no. 176, Tolstoy to Rumiantsev, 26 July/7 Aug. 1808, pp. 631–5. But see also e.g. VPR, 4, no. 101, Alopaeus to Rumiantsev, 18/30 April 1808, pp. 233–5, for just one of many examples of other Russian diplomats expressing very ‘Tolstoyan’ views.
9 Mémoires du Général Bennigsen, 3 vols., Paris, n.d., vol. 1, 4th letter, pp. 33–52; vol. 3, annex 53, pp. 377–95.
10 The main English-language source on Speransky remains Marc Raeff’s classic Mikhail Speransky: Statesman of Imperial
Russia, The Hague, 1969, but at the very least the anglophone reader should also turn to John Gooding, ‘The Liberalism of Michael Speransky’, Slavonic and East European Review, 64/3, 1986, pp. 401–24.
11 For de Maistre’s views, see D. V. Solov’eva (ed.), Graf Zhozef de Mestr: Peterburgskie pis’ma, SPB, 1995, no. 72, de Maistre to de Rossi, 20 Jan./1 Feb. 1808, pp. 98–101. For Caulaincourt, see RD, 1, no. 18, Caulaincourt to Napoleon, 13 Jan. 1808, pp. 48–51. Count A. de Nesselrode (ed.), Lettres et papiers du Chancelier Comte de Nesselrode 1760–1850, Paris, n.d., vol. 3, Nesselrode to Speransky, 2/14 April 1810, pp. 251–2. See also Joanna Woods, The Commissioner’s Daughter: The Story of Elizabeth Proby and Admiral Chichagov, Witney, 2000.
12 RA, 2, 1876, Prozorovsky to Golitsyn, 23 July/4 Aug. 1807, pp. 157–9. On the British angle, see Brendan Simms, Three Victories and a Defeat: The Rise and Fall of the First British Empire, 1714–1783, London, 2007.
13 On Ireland, see S. J. Connolly, Religion, Law and Power: The Making of Protestant Ireland 1660–1760, Oxford, 1992, pp. 249–50.
14 On the global context, see Christopher Bayly, The Birth of the Modern World 1780– 1914, Oxford, 2004, part 1, chs. 1–3, pp. 27–120; John Darwin, After Tamerlane: The Global History of Empire, London, 2007, ch. 4, ‘The Eurasian Revolution’, pp. 158–217.
15 RD, 5, no. 563, Caulaincourt to Champagny, 14 Dec. 1810, pp. 235–43.
16 Adams, Adams, p. 209.
17 Ibid., pp. 87, 432.
18 The debate on the origins of the Industrial Revolution seldom bothers even to mention Russia as a potential candidate. Apart from the reasons set out in the text, it is generally assumed that industrial take-off required a densely concentrated population. See e.g. the interesting discussion in Kenneth Pomeranz, The Great Divergence: China, Europe and the Making of the Modern World Economy, Princeton, 2000.
19 RD, 4, no. 334, Caulaincourt to Champagny, 3 Oct. 1809, pp. 110–16; no. 423, 11 March 1810, pp. 325–8.
20 P. Bailleu (ed.), Briefwechsel König Friedrich Wilhelm III’s und der Königin Luise mit Kaiser Alexander I, Leipzig, 1900, no. 157, Alexander to Friedrich Wilhelm, 2 Nov. 1807, pp. 167–8. VPR, 4, no. 146, Kurakin to Rumiantsev, 16/28 Aug. 1808, pp. 320–21, is merely one of many Russian appreciations on the damage done to any hopes of peace by Napoleon’s debacle in Spain. Another is no. 198, Rumiantsev to Alexander, 16/28 Dec. 1808, p. 441.
21 N. Shil’der: ‘Nakanune Erfurtskago svidaniia 1808 goda’, RS, 98/2, 1899, pp. 3–24, Marie to Alexander, 25 Aug. 1808 (OS), pp. 4–17. The Erfurt convention is in VPR, 4, no. 161, pp. 359–61.
22 RS, 98/2, 1899, Alexander to Marie, n.d. but certainly late Aug. 1808, pp. 17–24.
23 Correspondance de l’Empereur Alexandre, no. 19, Alexander to Catherine, 26 Sept. 1808, p. 20.
24 This paragraph is based on reading all the Russian diplomatic correspondence in these six months and it is impossible to cite all the relevant dispatches. The key ones are: VPR, 4, no. 131, Kurakin to Alexander, 2/14 July 1808, pp. 291–8; no. 143, Alexander to Kurakin, 14/26 Aug. 1808, pp. 316–17; no. 144, Rumiantsev to Kurakin, 14/26 Aug. 1808, pp. 317–19; no. 150, Alexander to Kurakin, 27 Aug./8 Sept. 1808, pp. 331–2; no. 174, Rumiantsev to Alexander, 26 Oct./7 Nov. 1808, pp. 387–9; no. 186, Anstedt to Saltykov, 22 Nov./4 Dec. 1808, pp. 410–12; no. 217, Rumiantsev to Alexander, 30 Jan./11 Feb. 1809, pp. 485–7; no. 220, Alexander to Rumiantsev, 2/14 Feb. 1809; no. 224, Alexander to Rumiantsev, 10/22 Feb. 1809, pp. 502–4; no. 246, Rumiantsev to Anstedt, 11/23 March 1809, pp. 543–5.
25 SIRIO, 89, 1893, no. 94, Rumiantsev to Tolstoy, March 1808, pp. 496–7; no. 112, Tolstoy to Rumiantsev, 26 April/8 May 1808, pp. 525–7.
26 Correspondance de l’Empereur Alexandre, Marie to Catherine, 23 Dec. 1809 (OS), pp. 251–7; Catherine to Marie, 26 Dec. 1809 (OS), pp. 259–60.
27 On the non-ratification of the convention, see RD, 4, no. 410, Caulaincourt to Champagny, 26 Feb. 1810, pp. 296–9; Barclay de Tolly’s memorandum is reproduced in MVUA 1812, 1/2, pp. 1–6.
28 VPR, 4, no. 221, Rumiantsev to Kurakin, 2/14 Feb. 1809, pp. 496–7.
29 The statistics are drawn from A. A. Podmazo, ‘Kontinental’naia blokada kak ekonomicheskaia prichina voiny 1812 g.’, Epokha 1812 goda: Issledovania, istochniki, istoriografiia, 137, TGIM, Moscow, 2003, vol. 2, pp. 248–66, and M. F. Zlotnikov, Kontinental’naia blokada i Rossiia, Moscow, 1966, ch. IX, pp. 335 ff. For Caulaincourt’s comment, see RD, 2, no. 179, Caulaincourt to Napoleon, 9 Dec. 1808, pp. 387–8.
30 Adams, Adams, pp. 236–8, 364; J. Hanoteau (ed.), Mémoires du Général de Caulaincourt, Duc de Vicenze, 3 vols., Paris, 1933, vol. 1, pp. 282–3. AGM, vol. 4, no. 1050, 25 Sept. 1811, pp. 479–86 for Nikolai Mordvinov’s memorandum on the Continental System.
31 SIRIO, 121, 1906, Chernyshev to Barclay de Tolly, 31 Dec. 1811/12 Jan. 1812, pp. 196–202. V. M Bezotosnyi, Razvedka i plany storon v 1812 godu, Moscow, 2005, pp. 51–5.
32 The quote is from a letter to Rumiantsev from Chernyshev dated 6/18 June 1810: SIRIO, 121, 1906, no. 7, pp. 55–8.
33 Nesselrode (ed.), Nesselrode, vol. 3, 5/17 July 1811, pp. 375–9.
34 The memorandum is reprinted in N. K. Shil’der, Imperator Aleksandr pervyi: Ego zhizn’ i tsarstvovanie, 4 vols., SPB, 1897, vol. 3, pp. 471–83, but note the comment in VPR, 5, note 246, pp 692–3, which corrects Shil’der’s error as to when this report reached Alexander.
35 All this is drawn from Chernyshev’s reports to Alexander, Barclay de Tolly and Rumiantsev published in SIRIO, 121, 1906, parts 2 and 4, pp. 32–108 and 114–204. The quote is from report no. 6, to Barclay, dated Nov. 1811, pp. 178–87. Chernyshev’s one error was a moment of carelessness on departure in 1812 which allowed his agent in the War Ministry to be caught. Vandal, Napoléon et Alexandre, vol. 3, pp. 306–18, 377, 393, discusses Chernyshev’s activities. Some details differ: for example, he writes that the War Ministry’s ‘book’ was produced every fortnight. More importantly, he underestimates the scale and impact of Chernyshev’s role, let alone the importance of his and Nesselrode’s information combined.
36 Bailleu (ed.), Briefwechsel, no. 192, Frederick William to Alexander, 19/31 Oct. 1809, pp. 204–5. Nesselrode (ed.), Nesselrode, vol. 3, Nesselrode to Speransky, 6/18 Aug. 1811, pp. 382–5. The most detailed description of Chernyshev’s activities is ch. 2 of General A. Mikhailovskii-Danilevskii, Zhizneopisanie kniazia Aleksandra Ivanovicha Chernysheva ot 1801 do 1815 goda, reprinted in Rossiiskii arkhiv, 7, Moscow, 1996, pp. 13–40.
37 SIRIO, 121, 1906, no. 12, Chernyshev to Barclay, received 3 March 1812, pp. 204–10.
38 VPR, 6, Barclay de Tolly to Alexander, 22 Jan./3 Feb. 1812, pp. 267–9.
39 By far the best source in English on these men and issues is Alexander Martin, Romantics, Reformers, Reactionaries: Russian Conservative Thought and Politics in the Reign of Alexander I, De Kalb, Ill., 1997. There are also useful biographical details about Rostopchin in A. Kondratenko, Zhizn’ Rostopchina, Orel, 2002.
40 All this discussion is drawn from Richard Pipes’s excellent translation and analysis of Karamzin’s work: see R. Pipes, Karamzin’s Memoir on Ancient and Modern Russia: ATranslation and Analysis, Ann Arbor, 2005; the quote is from p. 146.
41 Ibid., pp. 147–67.
42 VPR, 6, no. 137, Rumiantsev to Stackelberg, 28 March/9 April 1812, pp. 341–3; no. 158, Stackelberg to Rumiantsev, 29 April/11 May 1812, pp. 393–4.
43 Bailleu (ed.), Briefwechsel, no. 196, Frederick William to Alexander, 30 April/12 May 1812, pp. 214–18.
44 W. H. Zawadski, A Man of Honour: Adam Czartoryski as a Statesman of Russia and Poland 1795–1831, Oxford, 1993, pp. 188–205. See VPR, 6, p. 693, n. 98 for a detailed demolition of Vandal’s statement that Russia was planning a pre-emptive strike in 1811.
45 W. Oncken, Österreich und Preussen in Befreiungskriege, 2 vols., Berlin, 1878, vol. 2, appendices, no. 30, Saint-Julien to Metternich, 13 Aug. 1811, pp. 611–14.
46 Bailleu (ed.), Briefwechsel, no. 198, Alexander to Frederick William, 14
May 1811, pp. 219–22; no. 208, Frederick William to Alexander, 19/31 March 1812, pp. 238–9.
47 I. G. Fabritsius, Glavnoe inzhenernoe upravlenie, SVM, 7, SPB, 1902, pp. 733–58. There is a new and interesting book on Ottoman warfare by Virginia Aksan: Ottoman Wars 1700–1870: An Empire Besieged, London, 2007. If it has a weakness it is that it says too little about actual battle and tactics.
48 SIRIO, 121, 1906, no. 13, Chernyshev to Rumiantsev, 13/25 July 1810, and no. 15, 5/17 Sept. 1810, pp. 75–80 and 88–95. For his account of his mission to Sweden, see SIRIO, 121, pp. 22–48.
49 The quote is from a letter from Bernadotte to Count Löwenhielm, the special Swedish emissary to Alexander, dated 7/19 March 1812 and published in La Suède et la Russie: Documents et matériaux 1809–1818, Uppsala, 1985, pp. 96–8. The text of the Russo-Swedish treaty of alliance is no. 66, pp. 105–11.
50 The phrase ‘blundered towards empire’ was suggested by Owen Connelly to describe Napoleon’s campaigns: Blundering to Glory: Napoleon’s Military Campaigns, Wilmington, Del., 1987.
51 The literature on Napoleon’s empire is so immense that any attempt at a bibliography is impossible here. The best up-to-date general history in my opinion is Thierry Lentz, Nouvelle histoire du Premier Empire, 3 vols., Paris, 2004–7. In English, the best recent works include P. Dwyer (ed.), Napoleon and Europe, Harlow, 2001; M. Broers, Europe under Napoleon, London, 1996; S. Wolff, Napoleon’s Integration of Europe, London, 1991.
52 See above all Christopher Bayly, Indian Society and the Making of the British Empire, Cambridge, 1988, ch. 3, and the chapters by Michael Duffy, Patrick O’Brien and Rajat Kanta Ray in P. J. Marshall (ed.), The Oxford History of the British Empire: The Eighteenth Century, Oxford, 1998.
53 Rajat Kanta Ray, ‘Indian Society and the Establishment of British Supremacy, 1765–1818’, in Marshall (ed.), British Empire, pp. 509–29, at p. 525. On changing European views on overseas empire, see especially Jennifer Pitts, A Turn to Empire: The Rise of Imperial Liberalism in Britain and France, Princeton, 2005. On French (and other) views of eastern Europe, see Larry Wolff, Inventing Eastern Europe: The Map of Civilization on the Mind of the Enlightenment, Stanford, Calif., 1994.
Russia Against Napoleon: The True Story of the Campaigns of War and Peace Page 73
