"We set fire to our own house." Bishop Tikhon Shevkunov about the Russian Revolution. Bishop Tikhon (Shevkunov) gave a lecture in Yekaterinburg on the dangers of revolutions. What the falsifiers of the Tsar’s diaries felt

On Sunday, September 3, the multimedia historical park “Russia - My History” was opened in Yekaterinburg. The curator of the project, Bishop Tikhon (Shevkunov), gave a lecture on the prerequisites of the revolution and called Lenin “grandfather.” This was reported by Znak.com.

The multimedia historical park in Yekaterinburg is the country's first regional copy of the multimedia park, which began to develop in 2013 in Moscow at VDNKh with the participation of the Russian Orthodox Church. The ideologist of the project is the vicar of the Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus', Bishop Tikhon (Shevkunov), who is also the head of the Patriarchal Council for Culture.

Related materials

The opening of the park was attended by the acting governor of the Sverdlovsk region Evgeny Kuyvashev, the former governor of the region and now senator Eduard Rossel. The first deputy head of the Presidential Administration, Sergei Kiriyenko, sent a welcoming telegram.

The project is financed by Gazprom. The company assumed the main costs for the construction of the historical parks “Russia - My History”. By the end of the year, 15 more such parks will open in the country. To create a Ural complex with an area of ​​about 4,000 sq. meters it took 9 months and 350 million rubles.

Father Tikhon took part in the opening of the Yekaterinburg exhibition division. And then, there, he gave an almost three-hour lecture for humanities students and students of the Yekaterinburg Theological Seminary on the topic of the prerequisites for the February Revolution of 1917 in Russia, which ended with the overthrow of the monarchy.

“The October Revolution is only the most severe consequence of what happened in February and on the eve of these events,” the lecturer noted. - Was there at least one other event that influenced each of the inhabitants of the Russian Empire in the same way? Without the February Revolution, without the unprecedented movement that it caused, we would not have existed.”

During his lecture, Shevkunov carefully emphasized one idea: “The main source of all problems is ourselves, man and society.” A sick society as an a priori antipode to a talented ruler: “If our body is weakened, if we do not do what we need to do to maintain our physical health, immunity falls, and any virus becomes the cause of a serious illness. Therefore, when we talk about the causes of February 1917, we must not forget that these are only viruses, social, intellectual infections that developed due to favorable conditions of reduced political, social, and spiritual immunity. We ourselves allowed this!” - the lecturer noted.

In the first part of the lecture, according to the publication’s correspondent, Father Tikhon, having previously promised “not to make value judgments, but to rely on facts and historical documents,” trashed the theses of Soviet historians about Russia in the first quarter of the 20th century. Like those that say: “Tsarist Russia is a hopelessly backward, dark and impoverished country, oppressed by a mediocre monarchical regime,” “Prison of Nations,” or “Stalin took Russia with a plow, but left it with a nuclear bomb.”

“So, by 1913, Russia was the 4th-5th economy in the world,” the lecturer began to carefully list all the various achievements of Tsarist Russia. - The USA and England were ahead of us, or rather, the British Empire - the largest country in the world. Russia was the very first country in the world in terms of industrial production growth, like China now. During the reign of Nicholas II, the population of Russia grew by 50 million people - never before at such a pace. The conditions were extremely favorable! Let me just say that from 1911 to 1914 the fixed capital of high-tech industrial enterprises doubled. Coal production increased fivefold, iron smelting increased fourfold, copper production increased fivefold. 12 million tons of oil have been produced in Russia. For comparison, the USA has 10 million tons of oil. The production of cotton fabrics has doubled. The number of jobs increased from 2 million to 5 million. The list of discoveries of Russian science is impressive: the periodic table, an incandescent lamp, airplanes, a machine gun, a gas mask, a parachute, a seismograph, a television. For example, when during the First World War Russia had to place its orders in America, thousands of Russian engineers were sent there and within two years they created a military industry in the United States from scratch.”

“Was the country interesting? - Shevkunov asked the audience and, without waiting for an answer, continued. - The country was covered under Nicholas II with a network of railways. During his reign their length doubled. The pace of construction is completely unprecedented: Transsib - 500 km per year. For comparison, the Germans built the Istanbul - Baghdad railway at a rate of 120 km per year. The British - Cairo - Cape Town - 300 km per year. In the USSR, the BAM is 200 km per year, and this is with other technologies.”

There are no problems in the agricultural sector either. “Russia was in first place in grain production in the world. 68% of the land in the European part belonged to peasants, from the Urals to Siberia - 100%. But, for comparison, the wonderful democratic country of Great Britain, where 0% of the land belonged to peasants. Everything belonged to the landlords, the peasants rented everything,” the lecturer announced.

Having talked about workers, he somewhat unexpectedly admitted that “problems also existed” - “Russian workers received less than workers in Germany, the USA, England and France.” However, almost immediately Father Tikhon corrected himself: “And the workers of revolutionary Petrograd received relatively similar salaries, and about 50% of the workers lived in their own housing. The social activity of the state after the revolution of 1905 provided them with relatively good living conditions. Kindergartens, nurseries, hospitals - all this was born at that time.”

As a Znak.com correspondent reports, crime was also minimal. “During the 22 years of the reign of Nicholas II, as he is also called “Bloody,” 4,500 death sentences were imposed. The same amount was carried out on average in six months in the Soviet Union. Russia is called a despotic state, but they forget that censorship was abolished in the country in 1906. The Bolsheviks sat in parliament and said from the rostrum: “Our goal is the destruction of the state system.” The information is shocking for some, but it’s true,” Father Tikhon continued.

According to Shevkunov, there were no serious problems in the political sphere. “After the revolution of 1907, Russia received a parliament and de facto became a constitutional monarchy,” the lecturer told the students as an axiom. - On Nicholas II’s desk there were projects for five subways. What, it was impossible to build a metro without the Civil War, during which 15 million people died, and then emigration and the Gulag happened? It’s just not possible not to ask these questions.”

Moving directly to the events of February 1917, Shevkunov tried to give a derogatory description of the revolutionaries. In his terminology - “terrorists”. “Who is our main revolutionary in the 20th century? That's right - Grandfather Lenin, we remember everything well! In 1917, grandfather Lenin was in a wonderful country - Switzerland. He lived there for a long time. Lived in exile, in Zurich. Two months before February, on January 9, 1917, he spoke to the socialist youth of Zurich. And when he was asked a question about when the revolution would happen, he said: “We, the old people, will not live to see it, but you, the young people, will see for sure.” Two months before the February Revolution I didn’t realize - a good revolutionary! Then, when everything happened, he went to Germany, where they gave him money, put him in a special carriage and sent him through Sweden to his native homeland. Just how can you trust a person who said, I quote: “But I don’t give a damn about Russia, my dears,” the lecturer described Lenin to the students.

According to the publication, the protests of Petrograd workers, according to Shevkunov, were also provoked. Firstly, by the management of factories, and secondly, by foreign intelligence services. In general, in this part it seemed that the patriarch’s vicar was copying the lecture theses from the script of some “Orange Revolution”, as it is now presented on central Russian television: “The French resident describes how people who were in the service of British intelligence distributed money to the workers, who came out to demonstrate."

By the end of the lecture, the audience had no doubt - Nicholas II, the most enlightened and noble ruler in the history of the country, became a victim of a conspiracy. Among its participants, Father Tikhon repeatedly mentioned the “creative class and intelligentsia” - deputies of the State Duma, industrialists, and the press.

The goal of February 1917, as Shevkunov emphasized, was “to replace Nikolai Alexandrovich with someone more accommodating.” At the same time, the lecturer completely removed all blame from Nicholas II himself, his wife Empress Elizabeth Feodorovna, who was suspected by contemporaries of spying for Germany, and Grigory Rasputin, a member of their family - “there is no evidence.” Moreover, “the tsar acted absolutely correctly in the situation in February” - “he realized that if he began to resist, a civil war would begin, and he stepped away, the creative society took power into its own hands and ruined the country.”

Member of the Presidential Council of the Russian Federation for Culture and Art, writer, archimandrite, together with young history teachers of the Tavrida Forum, looked at the tragic events of a hundred years ago

The All-Russian Youth Educational Forum “Tavrida” visited on July 29 archimandrite Tikhon(Shevkunov), member of the Presidential Council for Culture and Art, writer and one of the most famous clergy of the Russian Orthodox Church. Together with the forum participants - young history teachers - he addressed the events of almost a century ago - the 1917 revolution and its causes, and also spoke about the key tasks that the professional historical community faces today.

“The key reason for the February Revolution of 1917 was the weakness of our monarchy. In addition, in the society of that time, various forces incited the idea that all troubles, both in domestic politics and in international relations, were to blame for one specific person and that as soon as Nicholas II was removed, everything would immediately become good and fair,” began Father Tikhon gave his speech to the participants of the Tavrida forum.

According to him, in the tenth years of the 20th century, the state apparatus faced an institutional crisis, which was influenced by external factors.

“Indeed, there were a number of shortcomings, many objective reasons that the tsarist government could not cope with. This “fertile” soil gave birth to turmoil at the top of the government, the radicalization of the labor movement, the crisis of the church and aggressive anti-government propaganda, which was actively carried out, including with support from abroad,” the forum guest emphasized.

Recalling the key internal reasons that led to the February events, Father Tikhon identified two key situations. Firstly, strong discontent in a war-weary society was caused by issues of unfair distribution of funds by Zemgor - the Main Committee for Army Supply of the All-Russian Zemstvo and City Unions. Secondly, the exit of the Russian Empire from the war as a winner, according to Father Tikhon, was decidedly not satisfactory for England.

“It was in the interests of England to directly and immediately weaken Russia and even, possibly, revise the international treaties and alliances of that time,” the bishop noted.

While at the international youth forum, the archimandrite turned his attention to the modern perception of the role of a historian and history teacher.

“The tragic events of 1917 became a huge lesson for the whole country, for all our people. On the eve of the centennial anniversary of the Russian Revolution, these topics will once again find a response and will be discussed in society; we will certainly see a lot of analogies, perhaps calls for a repetition of the events of that time; this cannot be avoided. That is why it is extremely important for you, as professional historians, to delve into and understand the real course of events that unfolded on the eve of February 1917 and later, in order to proceed from this experience, comprehend it and do everything in your power to prevent this chronic disease from happening again. has entered the stage of exacerbation,” concluded Father Tikhon.

Let us remind you that the All-Russian Youth Educational Forum “Tavrida” started on July 1 in Crimea. Participants in all 7 sessions of the site will be about 3,000 young people aged 18 to 30 years - teachers of creative professions and young professionals of various creative fields from all over Russia. On July 25, the IV profile session “Young History Teachers” started.

The forum is held on behalf of the President of Russia Vladimir Putin. The organizers of the site are the Federal Agency for Youth Affairs, the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation and Rospatriottsentr under the supervision of the Office of the President of the Russian Federation for Public Projects.

Press service of the RF OP based on materials from the press service of the Tavrida forum

Tikhon Shevkunov is known as “Putin’s confessor.”
Although, as we understand, there is no official confirmation.
He gave a lecture at the St. Petersburg Cultural Forum, Fontanka made a summary, and it’s worth reading.

"1. Before the February Revolution, Russia lived well. Its successes were largely due to the activities of Nicholas II.

“We lagged behind in many indicators, but the Russian economy was fourth or fifth in the world. Let's just remind ourselves of the level of industry and science! Only the list of inventions of Russian engineers and designers looks like this: a periodic system of chemical elements, an incandescent lamp, electric welding, an airplane, a gas mask, a seismograph, a parachute, a television. Russian gunsmiths were especially famous. When Russia was forced to send thousands of engineers to America at the height of World War I, within two years they created the United States military industry almost from scratch.”

In relation to the agriculture of the Russian Empire, one can “fearlessly use the word prosperity”: “The peasants owned more than 67% of the cultivated land in the European part of the country, and beyond the Urals - 100%.” Russia was covered with a network of railways, the life of society after 1905 experienced a real flourishing: “More periodicals were published under Nicholas II than in the USSR in 1988.” The government introduced a project on universal primary education to the State Duma.

“As for the stereotype of Russia as a prison of nations, there were problems here, but these excesses were a thing of the past. The national outskirts were represented in the State Duma. There was a parliament in the Principality of Finland, and women had the right to vote.” “As for censorship, it was almost completely abolished after the events of the first Russian revolution. Even the censorship introduced during the war was very relative.”

2. Alexandra Feodorovna was a “woman with a Russian soul,” but had no influence on events.

“When the All-Russian Extraordinary Commission was created in March 1917, which set itself the task of investigating the crimes of the tsarist regime, no significant influence of Alexandra Fedorovna or Rasputin on events of national importance was found. Alexandra Fedorovna’s letters to her husband were examined: only at 17 did she advise something to Nicholas II or convey Rasputin’s advice. Not a single one of these recommendations was implemented.

I will express my personal opinion: Alexandra Feodorovna was a woman with a Russian soul, German punctuality and English upbringing. She wrote to her husband: what are you doing - arrest Guchkov, dissolve the Duma, now is not the time for weak liberal actions. Then, after the war, everything will be restored, but now they are destroying the country.”

3. The behavior of the Russian liberal intelligentsia, which criticized the tsarist regime before the February Revolution, is difficult to explain.

“Why, with such energy and intransigence, did these people demand, desire, want and do everything for changes to happen in Russia? Why was one of the popular expressions: “Better the Germans, but not the Romanovs?” Why was it said that a Russian intellectual could be a simple worker, but not a general or an official of the tsarist government? Why was there such intransigence? Why was this conspiracy of the aristocracy and industrialists such a success and such amazing support? Why was there such delight in Russia after the abdication of the throne, why did they talk about “Kerensky on a white horse”?”

“Putin’s confessor” - about the mass psychosis of the revolution
4. The Provisional Government and the Petrograd Council of Workers' and Soldiers' Deputies quickly destroyed the country, and the Bolsheviks "simply took power" in the fall of 1917.

“Order No. 1 (ordered the creation of elected committees from the lower ranks in all military units - Ed.) destroyed all discipline in the warring army. Were the people who made this decision in an adequate state? There were problems with statist, military, and professional adequacy.

The second decision is the dismissal of all governors and vice-governors. It was believed that free people would choose new ones. In this atmosphere, what we now call the vertical of power collapsed. We now understand how important this is. Then most of the people accepted the order with delight.

The next stage is to excommunicate the “minions of the tsarist regime,” gendarmes and police officers, from government power. The next one is to release prisoners, political prisoners, and among them there were, as we know, terrorists. In addition, another 100 thousand criminals were released. “Kerensky’s chicks” - that’s what they were called.

The rulers of February - Miliukov, Guchkov, Kerensky, Lvov - loved Russia endlessly. But, wanting the good of the country, they handed it over into the hands of a man who said: “But I, good gentlemen, don’t give a damn about Russia” - into the hands of Vladimir Ilyich Lenin.”

5. The state of Russia before the February Revolution was similar to “teenage complexes”, “mental epidemic” and “mass psychosis”. Our country’s experience is not unique, but Russia is the champion in such conditions.

“This behavior reminds me of something. I do not quote quotes about the negativism of the Russian intelligentsia, which have already become the talk of the town. No communication with government officials, always a negative attitude towards government decisions. It feels like our progressive society remained in adolescence then, did not grow up, did not overcome teenage problems and complexes.”

“This question was studied by psychologists, psychiatrists, philosophers - contemporaries of those events. The famous Russian physiologist Vladimir Mikhailovich Bekhterev wrote that mental epidemics sometimes cover a significant part of the population.”

“We can assume that in the process of revolutionary events something similar to mass psychosis took possession of society.” It cannot be said that this kind of condition happened only in our country. Although it is in Russia that mass psychoses occur “with frightening frequency,” starting from the Time of Troubles. “Professor of the Ukrainian Medical Academy, psychiatrist Oleg Syropyatov spoke about the mental epidemic in Ukraine in 2014. People don't understand the meaning of words. A person is overwhelmed by emotions and cannot move to a rational level.”

6. Mass psychosis may happen again

“We must understand that relapses of this kind occur, and acts are committed that become irreversible. Knowing about this universal disease, we need to seriously think about mental hygiene.”

“Our wonderful intelligentsia creative society latently carries this kind of illness within itself. This latent state worsens from time to time. This cannot be ignored.”
http://www.fontanka.ru/2017/11/17/140/

On the one hand, it seems to be protecting clean water, right?
On the other hand, that’s exactly what happened.

Do you know what the main problem is?
In the incorrect formulation of the question itself.

And Russia was not at all as good as some are trying to imagine today.
The country was backward, with an archaic political, legal and social structure.
Not recognizing this means coming into conflict with the facts.
And also suffer from mischief.

But Nicholas II was not as insignificant as the revolutionaries believe.
None of the rulers managed to lead the country through two revolutionary periods.
European monks did not always manage to somehow cope with even one, the matter ended in the chopping block.
And Nicholas II coped with the first revolutionary wave!

But the most important thing is that revolutions are not always good.

However, the issue, of course, is not about social psychoses.
The fact is that neither science nor public figures still understand how to make life better.
But people cannot and do not always want to wait.

What good is the idea that Russia in 1917 was gripped by psychosis?
Does Shevkunov know how Russia can avoid becoming infected with psychosis today?
Or, more precisely, not to fall into a revolutionary temptation, the cause of which some part of society will then declare psychosis?

Well, the drama of the Russian intelligentsia is well known.
We read Western books, looked at Western life, and let’s run around with guns like the Decembrists, bombs like the Narodniks and revolutionary ideas like everyone else.
And after that Lenin comes to power and says that the intelligentsia is by no means the brain of the nation, but...
Well, you know!

The great historian Vasily Osipovich Klyuchevsky, warning both his contemporaries and descendants, said: “History is not a teacher, but a strict overseer: she does not teach anything, but severely punishes for ignorance of the lessons.” One could add: punishes generations. This strict matron does not give lessons, but harshly asks for their ignorance.

Almost all the peoples of the world have faced this, but for us today it is important how our compatriots faced this ignorance of the lessons of history and how painful it became for entire generations when their ancestors could not understand the truth of history and understand what their actions would be destructive for them themselves and for their children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren.

The topic that is especially important for us today is the events of the seventeenth year - and in particular, the February Revolution. The October Revolution is only the most severe consequence of what happened in February, and in the broad sense of the word, long before February, because the preparation and maturation of these events lasted for many years.

Without the February Revolution, without that forced and unprecedented human movement caused by its consequences, by and large, we would not exist as a society in the form in which we are now. Some of our grandfathers and great-grandfathers left their homes, found refuge on the other side of the country or fled into exile, some were repressed, some took part in the repressions. Some made a career, while others had their careers ruined in the Gulag. Some sat back, realizing that horror had come to our land, while others, despite everything, lived and acted creatively.

We are not going to “defame history” - everything that happened is our history. And the more deeply and honestly, without deception, we know it, the more we will know ourselves. In medicine now there is a special diagnosis - genetic. They study the genetic parameters of parents and grandparents and determine what disease their descendant is most likely to suffer from. When the disease occurs. And what needs to be done to prevent this disease.

By analogy with this, knowledge of our social and national, let’s say, generic, “genetic diseases” is extremely important for every thinking person. And using the example of the February events and the previous period, we will try to understand what our relatively recent history tells us and teaches us.

I would like to especially emphasize right away: there is the main reason for all our adversities, there is their main culprit - we ourselves. This must be understood first of all, so as not to create any illusions. For example: if a person is physically healthy, his immunity is strong, he can resist the external influence of viruses and bacteria. We know this from our own personal experience. If our body is weakened, if we live unhealthy, then the body’s defenses weaken and any unfavorable external factors - bacteria, viruses - become the cause of illness and sometimes death.

Speaking about the many reasons associated with the crisis of 1917, we should never forget that purely external reasons are just those, relatively speaking, viruses and bacteria that multiplied in favorable conditions of reduced public, political, social, spiritual immunity - and this decrease in immunity, in turn, was allowed by us ourselves.

So we will not look for those responsible, much less assign them. We will determine key points based not on our value judgments, but on sources - historical documents, reliable evidence. All quotes that will be given here can be found in historical studies available to everyone today.

Where is Russia with its plow?

So what was happening in 1917? There is a widespread opinion that Tsarist Russia at that time was a hopelessly backward, dark, impoverished country, whose people were oppressed by a mediocre and bloody monarchical regime. For example, one of our modern university textbooks on the history of Russia of the 20th century says: “The life of Tsarist Russia was characterized by poverty, backwardness, heavy oppression of the autocracy, and military devastation.” To what extent was this really true?

Let us remember the famous words that are often quoted by apologists of Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin: “Stalin took Russia with a plow and left it with a nuclear bomb.” It is stated that the author of this statement is Winston Churchill. But if we turn to reliable sources, we will see that Churchill in 1917 was very sympathetic to Russia and Nicholas II.

In one of the sources of that time, which we can document, he described Russia as a rapidly developing country that resisted three empires - German, Austro-Hungarian, Turkish - and withstood the unusually strong blows of the First World War.

“...In March the Tsar was on the throne; The Russian Empire and the Russian army held out, the front was secured and victory was undeniable.

According to the superficial fashion of our time, the tsarist system is usually interpreted as a blind, rotten tyranny, incapable of anything. But an analysis of the thirty months of war with Germany and Austria should correct these facile ideas. We can measure the strength of the Russian Empire by the blows it suffered, by the disasters it survived, by the inexhaustible forces it developed, and by the restoration of strength of which it was capable.”

So where is Russia with its plow? If we delve into the sources, we will see that the mentioned phrase about the plow and the bomb was actually uttered, only it was not Winston Churchill who said it, but the English Marxist Isaac Deutscher. We don’t know anything special about him, but it is clear that it was the apologist of Marxism after the death of Stalin, wanting to elevate his hero, who uttered such words.

In 1912, the famous French economist and journalist Edmond Théry arrived in Russia. Then the Russian government periodically took large loans from France for our industry and military affairs. Everyone understood that war was most likely just around the corner. So, Teri arrived on behalf of French banks to understand whether Russia can be given new loans and whether it is solvent.

Having examined the industry of our country and the general situation in it, he wrote in his report that if the affairs of European countries go the same way as they went from 1900 to 1912, then by 1950 Russia will dominate Europe. For us, who grew up in the Soviet Union, this is a complete surprise! After all, everyone was taught that we have a hopeless past and, apart from horror, backwardness and illiteracy, there is nothing to remember about the economy and social life of Tsarist Russia. And suddenly it turns out that a serious and responsible French economist produces such a summary.

Another interesting example. In 1920, the newly-minted Ministry of Education, which in those days was called Narkompros, decided to study what the degree of literacy was in the then new Soviet Russia. A census of the literate population was conducted. Let me remind you that this was 1920 - the third year of the civil war, when many schools did not work, and teachers had nothing to pay. So, it turned out that among teenagers aged 12–16 years, in some provinces up to 86% are literate. How could this happen?

It turns out that in 1908, a law on universal primary education was submitted to the Duma - it was not yet adopted, but it was accepted, and this project of universal primary education began to be actively implemented. So most of the teenagers of that time were literate, because they graduated from primary school or, in any case, studied in it for some time.

What kind of life was it like in Tsarist Russia? Also “hopeless, poor, terrible”? Of course, there was all sorts of things. But by 1913, the dynamics of the country’s development, and the situation in Russia itself, did not seem catastrophic at all. Again, an example comes to mind. We had a great actress - Alexandra Aleksandrovna Yablochkina. She was born in 1866 and lived to be 97 years old. So, in Khrushchev’s times, when they talked a lot and enthusiastically about building communism in the near future, she met with young people and was asked the question: “Comrade Yablochkina, communism will come soon! What will life be like then? How do you imagine this? Yablochkina was already an elderly woman, maybe she had nothing to lose, maybe from sincere simplicity, but she answered soulfully: “Children, how can I tell you what will happen under communism? It will probably be almost as good as under the Tsar.”

It is clear that not everything was smooth in Tsarist Russia. It is clear that it was by no means a country with milk rivers and jelly banks. But such evidence is also important. And this needs to be dealt with.

Another example. Nikita Sergeevich Khrushchev, a convinced communist who crushed the foundations of the old world. Being already the first secretary, one day he could not stand it and said: “When I was a mechanic at a mine before the revolution, I lived better than when I was the second secretary of the Ukrainian regional party committee.” Wow! And this is Khrushchev. No joke.

But another truly outstanding Soviet leader is Alexei Nikolaevich Kosygin. He was our, so to speak, prime minister during the Brezhnev era. This man talked about his family: his father was a worker at a St. Petersburg factory, a widower, and raised three, it seems, children. Kosygin talks about his childhood simply, without hinting at anything: they lived in their own three-room apartment in St. Petersburg, his mother, being ill, did not work, they had a servant, and the whole family often went to the theater on Sundays.

This evidence, in my opinion, is enough to encourage oneself to do some research and try to understand what Russia was like during the times of that “weak”, “spineless”, “insignificant” Emperor Nicholas II. Let's look at statistics and numbers. First, let's talk about the good, then let's talk about the bad, because, naturally, there was both in abundance.

There have never been such growth rates in the entire history of our country.

By 1913, the Russian Empire was either the fourth or - by some indicators - the fifth economy in the world. We were ahead, and seriously ahead, of the United States, Great Britain, and Germany. We shared fourth or fifth place with the French Republic. The British Empire - India, Pakistan, Africa, Australia and so on - was at that time the largest power in the world in terms of size. But, what is very important, Russia, ahead of even America, was the first country in the world in terms of growth rates of industrial production - just like China is now.

During the reign of Nicholas II from 1894 to 1917, the population of Russia grew by 50 million people. Never in our entire history have we seen such growth rates. What does this phenomenon mean? That especially favorable conditions for the life of the people were created. Accordingly, medicine and social protection must be at a certain level. But we will return to this. In 1906, Dmitry Ivanovich Mendeleev calculated that at such rates of population growth, 600 million people should live in Russia by the end of the century, that is, by the year 2000.

I will not list all the factories that were created then; I will only say that the fixed capital of high-tech machine-building enterprises doubled in just three pre-war years. Coal production in the Russian Empire increased fivefold during the reign of Nicholas II. Iron smelting - four times. Copper - five times. Russia produced 12 million tons of oil; for comparison: in the USA - 10 million tons. The production of cotton fabrics more than doubled, and Russia became the world's largest exporter of textile products. The number of jobs during the reign of Nicholas II increased from two to five million.

The list of discoveries of Russian science is also impressive: the periodic table of Mendeleev, an incandescent lamp, electric welding, an airplane - in parallel with the Wright brothers, a radio, a spacesuit, a gas mask, a machine gun, a parachute, a seismograph, a television. Russian engineers created ships, cars, tanks. When Russia was forced to place military orders in America at the height of World War I, thousands of Russian engineers were sent there and within two years they created the military industry of the United States. Here is a quote from a study by our military historians Barsukov and Yakovlev:

“Russia issued orders to the United States worth $1.23 billion.

Up to 70% were artillery orders, for which Russia paid 1.8 billion gold rubles.

Mainly due to Russian gold, a military industry of enormous scale grew in America, whereas before the World War the American military industry was only in its infancy.

Thousands of Russian engineers and technicians went to carry out military production.

In the American state of Connecticut alone, about two thousand people worked.”

Now to the question of the notorious plow - agriculture. Russia was in first place in the world in grain production. By 1913, the gross grain harvest in the Russian Empire was one and a half times higher than the harvests of Argentina, the USA and Canada combined. Our average yield was lower than, say, in the USA - an average of eight centners per hectare, while they had ten. But we have a different climatic zone, and if in the south the harvests were high, then in the north they were sometimes insignificant, and the overall indicators added up together.

Under Nicholas II, the country was covered with a network of railways. During his reign, their length doubled, while the pace of railway construction was truly unprecedented. The world's largest Trans-Siberian Railway was built at a speed of 500 kilometers per year - this is in our swamps and taiga.

Groundbreaking ceremony for the Trans-Siberian Railway. 1891

For comparison: the Germans built the Istanbul-Baghdad railway at the speed of 120 kilometers per year at the request of the Turks; the British - the Cairo-Cape Town trans-African road at a speed of 300 kilometers per year. In the USSR, the well-known Baikal-Amur Mainline was laid at a speed of 200 kilometers per year, despite the fact that this was construction with completely different technologies and with completely different capabilities. In 1917, the ice-free port of Romanov-on-Murman - present-day Murmansk - was put into operation.

In general, Russian workers received less, and sometimes significantly less, than workers in Germany, the United States of America, England and France. But the wages of workers in St. Petersburg were comparable, and, say, at the Putilov plant, they sometimes exceeded the wages of French workers. About half of the workers lived in their own housing - and this despite the fact that just a decade and a half ago their main habitat was barracks.

After the revolutionary upheavals of 1905, the social activity of the state and capital sought to ensure a generally normal, decent life for workers. The situation, as they say, was changing before our eyes, and this is not an exaggeration. This happened in Moscow, Naro-Fominsk, and Tula, this happened in our textile regions. In addition, kindergartens, nurseries, and sick leave - all this arose precisely in the “damned Nicholas time”.

The national question... There is a common phrase that Tsarist Russia was a prison of nations. Of course, there were excesses, there were difficult moments in the Caucasus, there were complications in Poland, which was then part of the Russian Empire, there were Jewish pogroms. But we must understand that all this was gradually overcome. And, for example, the western territories - Poland, Finland, the Baltic states - did not live at all like in a prison, they developed rapidly and were much richer than native Russia.

There were groups there that sought to free themselves from tsarist rule. But there were also completely different groups who were completely satisfied with staying in the Empire. Finland, for example, had its own parliament, there was suffrage for women, which did not exist anywhere else in the world except New Zealand and Australia. Poland was also largely a self-governing territory.

Crime in the Russian Empire was not high - especially compared to what we saw later. During the twenty-two years of the reign of “Nicholas the Bloody,” as Emperor Nikolai Alexandrovich is called, 4,500 death sentences were imposed. This is as much as was carried out on average in six months during the Soviet Union. Moreover, in tsarist Russia, where political terror was an everyday occurrence, this number also included state criminals-terrorists.

Tsarist Russia is called a despotic, authoritarian state, but they deliberately forget that censorship was completely abolished in the Russian Empire in 1906. There was no censorship: write what you want, say what you want, including in parliament. The Bolsheviks sat in the Duma and broadcast from the rostrum: “Our goal is the destruction of the existing state system.” A huge number of newspapers of various kinds were published.

Since 1897, free medical care was introduced in Russia, which at that time was extremely backward relative to developed European countries in the field of health care. And by 1917, zemstvo hospitals and the zemstvo movement of doctors experienced such rapid growth that two-thirds of the population were provided with this free medical care. Only 7 percent of the Russian population was treated in paid medical institutions, the rest - in free ones, and medicines in the Russian Empire were free for all zemstvo patients. Among the zemstvo doctors there were many professional, educated and selfless people.

The level of medical services in cities such as St. Petersburg, Moscow, Kyiv, Kharkov, was no different, according to Western doctors, from the level of Paris, London and New York. Here is what the Swiss physician and medical researcher Friedrich Erismann writes: “The medical organization created by the Russian zemstvo was the greatest achievement of our era in the field of social medicine.” It was in Tsarist Russia that the familiar ambulance stations, local doctors, sick leave, maternity hospitals, antenatal clinics, and dairy kitchens appeared.

During the reign of Nicholas II, not even his full reign, but from 1896 to 1910, he opened more schools, colleges, and institutes than during the entire previous period of Russian history. By 1913 there were 130 thousand schools in Russia.

The megaprojects of the Russian Empire were largely implemented by the Bolsheviks already during the Soviet period. In particular, the GOELRO plan - the electrification of the entire country - was conceived and developed back in Tsarist Russia. There were five metro projects on the emperor’s desk. There were plans to build the Turkestan-Siberian Railway, irrigation canals in Central Asia, and projects in areas such as aviation and the submarine fleet.

It is worth paying special attention to the finances of the empire. During the reign of Nicholas II, the state budget increased by 5.5 times, and the gold reserve by 4 times. The ruble was a reliable world currency. In addition, it was gold, that is, you could come, give a piece of paper and receive a gold coin. The State Bank interest rate did not exceed 5%. This made it possible to develop industry and lending. At the same time, the revenues of the treasury of the Russian Empire grew without any increase in taxes, that is, due to those fees that previously existed. Our taxes were four times less than, for example, taxes in England. Can you imagine what an incentive all this was, as they say now, for medium, small, and even large businesses.

Historians argue that Russia's problem was not backwardness, but, on the contrary, too rapid economic growth.

The most important issue in Russia has always been the question of land. We know that in 1861 the peasants were released by Emperor Alexander II. Of course, the problem of landlord and peasant land ownership continued to exist for a long time after this and continued to remain relevant until the 17th year. “Land for the peasants!” - we all know this slogan of those who had a magical effect on the people and soon, without hesitation, took away all the land property from our peasants. So, if we look at pre-revolutionary statistics and compare them with what happened in other countries, we will see, without exaggeration, amazing facts.

How much land did peasants own by 1917? There are exact numbers. In the European part of Russia, peasants or their communities owned 68% of the land. And from the Urals to Siberia, peasants owned 100% of the land. How about comparison with other countries? And these numbers are also available. How much land do you think belonged to the peasants, that is, those who worked the land, in a democratic country like Great Britain? Zero. All the land belonged to the land lords, and the peasants rented this land.

But, of course, everything was not so simple. The number of peasant families grew, there was still not enough land, and mechanization was low compared to the world level. But again - dynamics! She was the most encouraging and positive. Compare the situation in 1861 and the seventeenth. But we followed the well-known common path: take everything away and divide it up. As a result, according to experts, when the Bolsheviks confiscated land from landowners and distributed it to peasant farms, the average size of allotments increased... by one and a half percent.

Another well-known requirement of that time was the eight-hour working day. In 1917 it really was eleven and a half hours, somewhere less. But there was a war going on, and reducing the working day, primarily at military factories, was at least a very strange demand. In England and France, for example, such slogans immediately provoked a brutal response from the state, and even all the workers of military factories were simply mobilized. Here is what the remarkable military historian Anton Kersnovsky, a contemporary of those events, writes:

“On February 18 (1917) a strike broke out at the Putilov plant. In democratic France, a factory working for defense that went on strike during wartime would be cordoned off by the Senegalese, and all the instigators would be put against the first wall they came across. In the “land of tyranny and the whip” not a single policeman has budged...”

In 1916, in Dublin, artillery bombed the entire city without any problems, thousands of people were killed - wartime laws. We had endless dialogues at the Putilov and other military enterprises in St. Petersburg, with trade unions and provocateurs who demanded higher wages and a shorter working day (in wartime, I emphasize once again, that is, the question here is about the number of weapons for the front and the combat capability of the country).

Yes, they all wanted to steer

If everything was so good, then why did the February coup happen? And who were its creators? What did they want, those who tried so hard that they created problems for themselves and their loved ones, and for subsequent generations, and for our entire country?

Who was at the head of the February Revolution? The first thing that comes to mind: revolutionaries. Who is our main revolutionary in the 20th century? “Grandfather Lenin”, we all remember this well. “Grandfather Lenin” in 1917 was in a wonderful and quiet country called Switzerland. He lived there for a long time, in exile in the glorious city of Zurich.

Two months before the revolutionary events that turned the whole world upside down, Vladimir Ilyich Lenin spoke to the Swiss socialist youth. It was January 9, 1917. Ilyich was asked the question: “Dear Vladimir Ilyich, when will the world revolution finally take place, including the revolution in Russia?” He answered this in Lenin’s direct way - I quote from the collected works of V.I. Lenin:

V. I. Lenin and N. K. Krupskaya. 1918

« We old people may not live to see the decisive battles of this coming revolution. But... it seems to me that young people... will have the happiness of not only fighting, but also winning in the coming proletarian revolution» .

The future leader of the revolution learned about the revolution in Russia from Swiss newspapers a month and a half later.

Nadezhda Konstantinovna Krupskaya recalled: “As soon as we learned about the events in Petrograd, Volodya could not find a place for himself, he ran, talked to himself, and made huge plans.” But in fairness, it must be said that Vladimir Ilyich made “mad” efforts, as he liked to say, to ensure that the situation in Russia was destabilized. But it was not he who became the arbiter of the destinies of our country that February.

Another famous revolutionary, Viktor Chernov, then led the largest revolutionary party - the Socialist Revolutionary movement. There were both terrorists and legal Social Revolutionaries. But he also writes that at that time, before February, there were no prerequisites for revolution; all the leaders of the revolutionary movement from among the Socialist Revolutionaries were either in prison, or in exile, or in distant emigration.

What kind of revolution is this without revolutionaries? Does this happen?

There was such a wonderful, intelligent man - American President Roosevelt, who once shared some important conclusion that he came to over the many years of his political life. He said: “Nothing happens by accident in politics. If something happened, it was planned that way.”

Undoubtedly, there were revolutionaries. Subsequently, some of them tried their best to distance themselves from the title “creator of February.” Other true creators made even greater efforts to remain in the shadows. Still others repented bitterly. Their names are no secret to anyone, especially historians. This is the head of the State Duma, Rodzianko, and with him the majority of State Duma deputies. These are Russian industrialists: Prince Lvov, Alexander Guchkov - the richest people in Russia. These are the Grand Dukes - the closest relatives of the sovereign. This is our domestic, Russian and Russian intelligentsia. These are the highest military ranks. This is the press. These are, undoubtedly, people who do not belong to the citizenship of the Russian Empire, about whom we will also talk.

The blame for allowing the preconditions and development of the revolution certainly lies with the government of Emperor Nicholas II. The conversation about this is difficult and special, but I am deeply convinced that it is necessary. We will definitely return to the analysis of the actions of the Sovereign and the government. Of course, not to accuse and judge. This applies to all participants in those events. But no one canceled the work on mistakes and debriefing. Remember Klyuchevsky: “History is not a teacher, but a strict overseer: she does not teach anything, but severely punishes for ignorance of the lessons.”

But still about the specific creators of the coup. These are our compatriots, the undisputed elite of the country at that time. In our difficult but prosperous country, they were people who stood at many important helms. And here’s what’s surprising: we can say with confidence: they all wanted the only good for Russia, they all endlessly, as they sincerely believed and convinced others, loved their country.

And so, with all their big hearts, wishing only the good of the Fatherland, these people finally in October handed over the country to a man who clearly defined his attitude towards it: “But, good gentlemen, I don’t give a damn about Russia.”

This is a Lenin quote recorded by the old Bolshevik Georgy Solomon. “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.” The saying of the Russian people became more relevant than ever during this period - a hundred years ago.

Yes, they loved Russia. But, it’s true, they also loved themselves. We recently held a conference at Sretensky Monastery, in which famous historians and heads of the largest Russian archives took part. After long and heated discussions, we asked: “What did Guchkov, Rodzianko, Lvov want in the end when they started all this intrigue? What did General Alekseev want - a man invested with the emperor’s endless trust, other generals who also loved Russia very much, but in their own words of late repentance, betrayed Nicholas II and took the path of conspiracy? And one of our oldest historians sighed and said: “Yes, they all wanted to steer. Steer." And this was very important for me: here we completely agreed.

Funeral service for participants of the February Revolution in the Naval Cathedral of Kronstadt

Why did Nicholas II enter the war?

Speaking about the reasons for the February Revolution, about its “drive belts” and its lessons, we naturally cannot help but dwell on the First World War.

This was the first gigantic massacre in human history. Millions of dead... A shock for the whole world - after all, they thought: we’ll fight, as always, for a month or two, and then we’ll figure out who won - Germany, the British and the French... But in fact, the unprecedented horror continued and grew year after year, for the first time there was such a number deaths. We cannot even imagine what psychological significance the First World War had, how it upended all previous ideas.

Let's not talk about the reasons for the war: it is clear: everyone wanted their own. But despite the fact that Russia also wanted its way, Emperor Nicholas II was the only one who really did everything to prevent war.

Sometimes they say: “Why did Nicholas II enter the war? There was no need to join." Wait, but Germany declared war on Russia, despite all of Nicholas’s letters to Wilhelm and even his pleas. Then the German army was, without exaggeration, the most powerful military machine in the world. Together with Austria-Hungary, she fought against the whole world for several years - just as fascist Germany fought against the whole world, including the Soviet Union, America, England, France. Now imagine that such a country declares war on us and invades the Russian Empire. A question for those wise guys who say that there was no need to fight: what should have been done in this case? The sovereign did everything that could be done to prevent war. And then we had to defend ourselves.

In 1914–1915, Russia suffered severe blows from Germany. We retreated in our west - both in the Kingdom of Poland and in the Baltic states. Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich was commander-in-chief. But when the war approached the original Russian western borders and the question of the surrender of Kyiv arose, Nicholas II assumed command of the army.

I heard a lot, including from historians: “That was a mistake! He shouldn't have done this. What kind of commander-in-chief he is..." Let's look at the facts. 1914–1915 - almost continuous defeats and retreats. A month after Emperor Nikolai Alexandrovich became commander-in-chief, the retreat stopped. He did not give up a single inch of Russian land. “A mediocre commander in chief...” And let’s compare what can be compared, correctly: the First and Second World Wars. Was there a heroic defense of Moscow? Siege of Petrograd? Surrender of Smolensk, Kyiv, Caucasus, Crimea?..

Russia, like all other countries except Germany, entered the war generally unprepared. We had a raging shell and weapons famine. Although - and this is again a return to what the Russian Empire was - by the beginning of the war, Russia had 263 aircraft, Germany had fewer - 232, in England even fewer - 258, in France - 156. And by the end of the war, Nikolai Alexandrovich organized a military industry that our Western allies had never even dreamed of. In 1917 we already had 1,500 airplanes. Can you imagine what it’s like to rebuild industry during a war? The Kovrov military plant was built, the future ZIL was laid.

Russia suffered many defeats and suffered many casualties. But these victims were fewer than in other warring countries: in our country there were 11 dead per 100 mobilized, in England - 13, in Germany - 15, in France - 17. There were 60 times fewer killed and wounded in the First World War in Russia than during the Great Patriotic War.

Nikolai Alexandrovich, as they say, was a mediocre commander. Was there a heroic defense of Moscow? Or maybe there was a blockade of Petrograd? Did the Germans take Kyiv, Kharkov? This, however, happened, but only a few months after the overthrow of the Tsar and the Commander-in-Chief. This mediocre, as someone puts it, commander did not allow any of this, although he fought with three empires and a number of their satellites. As one of the historians of our army said, Peter I rearmed the Russian army in twenty years, and Emperor Nicholas only needed two years for this. The rearmament of Russia was so devastating for our enemies that even the leaders of the German army admitted: with the potential that was developed in Russia, Germany had no chance of winning the war.

The Emperor himself planned many of the offensives. This, in particular, is the famous Lutsk breakthrough, which is sometimes called Brusilovsky, which practically destroyed the Austro-Hungarian army. In addition to the military victories, an astonishing diplomatic victory was won: an agreement was concluded, which went down in history as the Sykes-Picot Treaty. According to this agreement, as a result of the First World War, after the victory, Russia received the Bosphorus, the Dardanelles and all of northern Turkey, as well as collective control over Palestine, common with the British, and huge reparations from the aggressor - Germany. By the way, the victorious powers in the First World War, of which Russia was not included, stopped receiving payments from Germany for the First World War in 2010.

Nicholas II. 1916

Victory was just around the corner. Here, for example, is Denikin’s testimony: “I am not inclined to idealize our army, but when the Pharisees, the leaders of Russian revolutionary democracy, trying to justify the collapse of the army, caused mainly by their hands, claim that it was already close to disintegration, they are lying .<…>The old Russian army contained enough strength to continue the war and win victory.”

Yes, there were difficulties with transport, especially in the winter of 1917: an unprecedentedly snowy winter, drifts, but these were solvable problems, not catastrophic at all. By the way, Nikolai Alexandrovich prepared so many weapons that it was enough for the entire Civil War. Or how did you think the Reds and Whites fought, because the industry collapsed by the end of the seventeenth year. They fought with what was prepared by the tsarist government. The machine gun factory in Kovrov was the largest of its kind in the world.

Everything was prepared for victory. Even a special uniform was sewn for the victory parades in Berlin, Vienna and Constantinople, including headdresses similar to the ancient helmets of Russian knights, which later became known as “Budenovkas”. After the revolution, they were taken out of warehouses, the double-headed eagles were cut off and red stars were hung on them. At the same time, leather jackets were also made for aviators, which the commissars later wore.

Russia was not an Orthodox country at that time.

We all know the unfortunate fact that a person can go crazy. But the whole society can go crazy in the same way. Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky in his brilliant novel “Crime and Punishment” prophetically wrote how Raskolnikov, in a feverish delirium, had a dream that people were attacked, their consciousness was captured by some strange trichinas, and people became like crazy: they threw themselves at each other, tormented , they killed without understanding why. Some communities were organized, then these communities began to quarrel with each other until they were completely destroyed. The winners again rushed at others. Similar prophetic descriptions of the events of the seventeenth and subsequent years are present in the heritage of our great saints, who warned their compatriots about these terrible coming years.

This is what St. Seraphim of Sarov, who died in 1833, said: “A hundred years after my death, the Russian land will be stained with rivers of blood, but the Lord will not be completely angry and will not allow it to be destroyed; it will still preserve Orthodoxy and the remnants of Christian piety.” “We are on the way to revolution,” wrote St. Theophan the Recluse, who died in 1894. “The Russian kingdom is wavering, reeling and close to collapse,” said the holy righteous John of Kronstadt at the beginning of the 20th century. - A state that retreats from the Church will perish, just as Byzantium perished. A people who have departed from the heights of Orthodoxy will be given into slavery by the wicked, as happened with the same Byzantine kingdom. Rus', exalted to heaven for its Orthodoxy, will descend to hell.”

You can often hear the question: “How was the revolution and subsequent persecution of the Church in an Orthodox country possible?” In fact, Russia was not an Orthodox country at that time.

When they talk about loyalty to Orthodoxy, it is imperative to understand: we are not talking about loyalty to rituals or religion as such. We are talking about a true understanding of the essence of things, which, from our Orthodox point of view, can only be achieved by a deep personal connection with the Lord God. When a people loses this personal connection, they are abandoned by God.

In the Russian Empire there were many attributes of religiosity, but most people simply lost their spiritual connection with God and the Church: both seminarians and bishops, who enthusiastically embraced the February Revolution along with the entire intelligentsia, completely not understanding what would happen next. But this is a topic for a separate conversation.

And the army pulled off an intrigue

Events developed rapidly. It is believed that at the beginning of the seventeenth year, food problems began in the country. Indeed, food cards were introduced, but only for one product - sugar. Why sugar? But simply because they were making moonshine.

Moreover, by this time ration cards had been introduced in France and England. Even in the USA, even in Denmark. Read Remarque, Hemingway - they talk about how young people looked for certain products. In Austria-Hungary and Germany, an adult German in the rear received 220 grams of bread per day - this is less than in besieged Leningrad. In Germany and Austria-Hungary, more than a million people died from starvation.

Compared to this, Russia was a truly well-fed country. (By the way, historians sometimes call the February Revolution that way - “the revolution of the well-fed.”) The Kommersant newspaper of February 7, 1917 describes food problems in Petrograd:

“There are no lemons on the market at all. Frozen lemon is available on the market in extremely limited quantities, and the price for 330 pieces is 65 rubles. There are no pineapples."

For those who in a year will be living on ration cards, and a little more than twenty years later will find themselves in besieged Leningrad, the vagaries of the winter of 1717 with the lack of lemons will seem simply ridiculous.

But there was a more serious problem. For a short time, the government was unable to provide a full-scale supply of grain. There were 197 million pounds of tons left until the next harvest, which would be more than enough for Russia and for export to the allies. There was plenty of grain in Petrograd, but since there were snow jams on the railway, rumors began to spread that famine would soon come.

In general, rumors played a special role in all these terrible events. Our wonderful thinker and publicist Ivan Lukyanovich Solonevich wrote: “Rumors ruined Russia.” They believed the rumors one hundred percent: “They say that there will be no more bread - that means everyone will die of hunger! We brought Russia!”

Housewives lined up in long “tails,” as they were called then, and bought as much bread as possible. But no bread was delivered at that time; some bakeries were already empty. Then General Khabalov, the head of the Petrograd garrison, threw bread from the city reserves onto the shelves. But panic had already been sown. And on March 8, International Women's Day - February 23, old style, women and children took to the streets. Or rather, they were brought out: we remember the words of Roosevelt: “Nothing happens by chance in politics. If something happened, it was planned that way.” These women began to destroy stores full of bread, shouting: “Bread! Of bread!" It was real madness for the unfortunate women who were reduced to such a state that they feared starvation for their children.

Queue at a candy store in Petrograd. 1917

At the same time, no less strange things began to happen. At the Putilov plant - the most secure with military orders, with the highest wages - there was a small conflict between workers and the administration. Workers ask for a salary increase, the administration begins to negotiate with them... That was the Russian routine at that time. And suddenly, as if by order, the plant management fires all the workers. Lockout. 36 thousand healthy men find themselves on the street without work and with their reservations automatically cancelled, now the front awaits them.

Following the Putilovites, all the military factories in Petrograd begin to go on strike one after another. Can you imagine what needs to be done to get military factories up and running in wartime? What work needed to be done? Soon hundreds of thousands of workers are demonstrating. Who was interested in this?

Here is what Leon Trotsky writes: “February 23 was International Women’s Day. It was supposed to be celebrated in social democratic circles in the general manner - with meetings, speeches, leaflets. The day before, it never occurred to anyone that Women’s Day could become the first day of the revolution. None of the organizations called for strikes.” No organization called, but the number of demonstrators exceeded 300 thousand people. Does this happen? Soon the Petrograd garrison went over to the side of the rebels. The situation was becoming very serious. “If something happens in politics, it doesn’t happen by accident.”

Recently, the so-called “Tom’s archives” were opened in France, containing, among other things, reports from the French intelligence officer, resident in Petrograd Maleisi. This is how he describes the course of events:

“During the days of the revolution, Russian agents in the English service handed out bundles of rubles to the soldiers, encouraging them to put on red cockades.”

And a lot of such evidence can be cited.

Here Tatyana Botkina, a contemporary of the events, writes:

“The workers went on strike, walked in crowds through the streets, broke trams, lampposts, killed policemen, and killed them brutally, and, amazingly, women dealt with these servants of order. The reasons for these riots were not clear to anyone. The caught strikers were diligently questioned as to why they started all this trouble. The answer was: “We ourselves don’t know. They gave us three rubles and said: beat the trams and the policemen. Well, we hit.”

The Petrograd garrison, which was stationed in the city, consisted essentially not of military personnel, but of newly drafted recruits. Basically, of course, they did not want to fight at all and were already agitated by the forces that were systematically engaged in anti-government propaganda. And finally, the first murder of an officer - non-commissioned Kirpichnikov was the first to shoot his commander - a soldier's revolt began.

Nikolai Alexandrovich, having learned about what had happened in the capital, ordered a harsh end to the riot - this was his duty as a tsar. General Khabalov, commander of the Petrograd Military District, completely failed to carry out the order, and then the sovereign himself left for the capital from his headquarters in Mogilev. But at this time, the conspirators - and these were deputies of the State Duma, Guchkov with the conspirators and the highest army generals - did everything to force the emperor to abdicate the throne. For what? What was their goal? Replace Nicholas II with another, more accommodating and submissive to their will, head of state. Let's say, for the heir - Tsarevich Alexy during the regency of Nicholas II's brother - Mikhail.

Mikhail was personally a very brave man. He led the “Wild Division”, was a courageous military man, but not a politician at all, and his strong-willed qualities were also very doubtful, except for those of the army. This is exactly what we were counting on.

And they succeeded. The army, represented by its senior military leaders, carried out an intrigue. It was brewed by General Alekseev, the Chief of the General Staff, with the help of those people who directed him - in particular, Alexander Guchkov and Mikhail Rodzianko. They drew up such a telegram to the front commanders that they presented the situation as absolutely hopeless, and outlined only one way out - the abdication of Emperor Nicholas II.

And so the army, in whose loyalty the sovereign sacredly believed, which he led to victory, which he raised from a grave decline, led on the offensive - suddenly desired his abdication. The generals, whom the emperor himself nurtured, making them military leaders, all sent him telegrams: “We beg, Your Majesty, to renounce. You are a stumbling block. If you stay, the front will collapse and civil war will begin..."

The Tsar found himself pressed against the wall; before him were demands for abdication, ultimatums presented by all the commanders of the fronts, the State Duma, and his relatives - first of all, Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolaevich.

But that was not all. The abdication took place on March 2. And the day before, that is, March 1, when the emperor was still head of state, all allies - England, France and our future Entente ally the United States of America - recognized the temporary committee of the State Duma as the legitimate government.

Blackmailed on all sides by the danger of civil war, the advance of the Germans, while practically in captivity in Pskov by General Ruzsky, who hated him, he signed a renunciation in favor of his brother Mikhail, hoping to stop the unrest with this sacrifice.

Abdication of the throne of Nicholas II. In the royal carriage: Minister of the Court Baron Fredericks, General N. Ruzsky, V.V. Shulgin, A.I. Guchkov, Nicholas II. March 2, 1917 State Historical Museum.

It turned out that governing Russia is a very difficult task.

What happened next? On March 2, the Provisional Government, having received the abdication of Nicholas II, took power into its own hands. What was the delight of Petrograd, of all progressive, thinking Russia! One of the poets, Leonid Kannegiser, wrote: “Then at the blissful entrance // In a dying and joyful dream // I will remember - Russia, Freedom, Kerensky on a white horse.”

Unfortunately, our Church did not lag behind either. A remarkable hierarch, who later went through exile and prison, Archbishop Arseny (Stadnitsky) wrote: “Finally, the Church is free, what happiness!” It is difficult to enumerate - it takes a long time, and it is painful - the delights of all those people who very soon, within a few months, will understand how crazy they were, what they did.

But there was nothing that could be done. Remember, there is such a song based on the poems of Leonid Derbenev - seemingly frivolous, but in fact very wise - “This world was not invented by us.” There are these wonderful words: “And the world is structured in such a way // That everything is possible in it, // But after that nothing can be corrected.”

But progressive society did not yet know about this. On the contrary, everyone was happy and full of hope! “Finally, this insignificant, mediocre tsar is no more, finally the best people of Russia, the most worthy, the most intelligent, the most beautiful and skillful will lead our unfortunate country!”

On March 5, with one stroke of the pen, the new Provisional Government, these “geniuses” of management, abolished the entire local administration - governors, vice-governors. “We will not appoint anyone, they will choose them locally,” said the head of the Provisional Government, Prince Lvov. “Such issues should not be decided from the center, but by the population itself.” The future belongs to the people who have shown their genius in these present days. What a great happiness it is to live in these days!” Then they decided: “Eliminate the henchmen of the criminal tsarist regime!” They dispersed the police and gendarmes, destroyed not only the entire vertical of power, but even all the local authorities. Election madness began; they began to nominate some, others, thirds, fifths, tenths.

The economy came to a standstill, and by June Russia collapsed economically. The country became ungovernable.

They released all the criminals, they released all the terrorists who were imprisoned. They pulled out all the terrorists who had been expelled from abroad in sealed and unsealed carriages, and they began to take power in full.

What “brilliant” decisions were made regarding the army? Abolish subordination in the army - now it is not officers who should lead, but the Councils of Soldiers' Deputies. Discipline was broken in the army. The front also collapsed. That victory, tragic, difficult, but necessary for the country, which was already before our eyes, did not happen. The Germans launched a victorious offensive - they realized that they had achieved their goal.

What does “got your way” mean? The fact is that long before the February events it was decided that Nikolai Alexandrovich needed to be replaced - he was too intractable. This decision was made by both our Western partners and the German General Staff. The Germans tried to find ways to a separate peace between Germany and Russia. But Nikolai Alexandrovich was unshakable.

The Germans, through such an odious figure as Alexander Parvus, who was the first patron of our Bolsheviks at that time, began to conduct anti-state propaganda in the Russian Empire. It is clear what they needed: to disintegrate the country and the army from the inside. The General Staff of the Second Reich spoke about this without hesitation as its main goal: “Russia is invincible in an external war, the only way is to destroy it from within.” They turned out to be absolutely right.

But it was even harder with our allies. We remember how in 1944–1945 our allies did everything they could to push us away from German lands so that we would capture as little territory as possible in Europe. And in the First World War the same situation occurred. The British understood perfectly well: Russia would now occupy a dominant position, and 15 million Russian troops would be in Berlin, Vienna and Constantinople. It was a terrible dream for everyone - both for the Germans and for our allied partners.

This is what a man whom we all know well as a wonderful writer, Arthur Conan Doyle, wrote in 1920 in his journalistic article for the Daily Telegraph newspaper: “Even if Russia had won and remained an empire, wouldn’t it have been a source of new terrible threat? The commander-in-chief of the German army, General Ludendorff, wrote: “The Tsar was overthrown by a revolution supported by the Entente.”

Before this, in the middle of the 19th century, the English Prime Minister Lord Palmerston complained: “How difficult it is to live in the world when no one is at war with Russia.” You probably couldn’t say it more frankly... The creator and genius of the German military doctrine, Carl von Clausewitz, wrote that Russia “can only be defeated by its own weakness and the effects of internal strife.” This is precisely what the activities of German intelligence and the activities of British intelligence were aimed at. They thought with horror that our troops were about to find themselves in European cities.

The influence of Western partners and allies on the February events was undoubted and, if not decisive (let us remember the main factor, which we identified as the exhausted and torn public and state immunity), then very serious in the current situation. There are many documented examples of how the English ambassador George Buchanan openly involved the Russian aristocracy in a conspiracy against the emperor. There was only one task - to replace Nikolai Alexandrovich; at that time they did not think about changing the monarchy. Lenin wrote in 1917:

“The whole course of events of the February-March revolution shows clearly that the British and French embassies, with their agents and connections<…>directly sought to remove Nikolai Romanov.”

The participation of German agents was also recorded, acting in their own interests - weakening Russia and its withdrawal from the war against Germany. American bankers also made a significant contribution. But I repeat again and again: they were only secondary forces of the catastrophe. Each of these parties strongly encouraged ambitious representatives of the Russian elite, who firmly believed that they would govern the country much better than the Emperor. These people became the leaders of the Provisional Government, ultimately destroying the country in a few months.

It turned out that governing Russia is a very difficult task, and even the brightest populists adored by the intelligentsia - such as Lvov, Milyukov, Guchkov, Kerensky - turned out to be absolutely incapable of this. That is why Emperor Nicholas II categorically disagreed when, over the course of many months, he was offered to form a so-called “responsible government” from these people - the future February ministers. He knew perfectly well what they were worth: counterintelligence had reported to him, and he personally was well acquainted with them.

What did Nikolai Alexandrovich hope for in this situation, which was becoming more and more severe every day? He relied on the army. He was convinced that, no matter how habitually the Duma opposed him, no matter how his closest aristocratic relatives intrigued him, no matter how much the Russian intelligentsia opposed him, the army, his favorite brainchild, into which he had invested so much soul and effort, would not let him down. With the former governor of Mogilev, Pilz and Shcheglovitov, who were close to him, the Emperor shared his plans: restoring order should be delayed until the spring offensive of the Russian armies. Victories on the fronts will radically change the situation, and then it will be possible to remove the destructive opposition and begin the necessary social and government reforms (including the granting of independence to Poland). Obviously, in the midst of war, starting such transformations would be madness.

But not only the Emperor understood this.

Here is P.N Milyukov’s confession from his letter to Joseph Revenko in January 1918:

“You know that we made a firm decision to use the war to carry out a coup soon after the start of this war. At the end of April or beginning of May, our army was supposed to go on the offensive, as a result of which all hints of discontent would immediately cease completely and which would cause an explosion of patriotism and jubilation in the country.”

Ivan Lukyanovich Solonevich, already mentioned by us, analyzing the events of those days, wrote:

“The Emperor was overloaded beyond all human capabilities. And he had no assistants. He cared about losses in the army, and about smokeless powder, and about the aircraft of I. Sikorsky, and about the production of poisonous gases, and about protection from even more poisonous cabins. He was responsible for the command of the army, and diplomatic relations, and the difficult struggle with our premature parliament, and God knows what else. And it was here that the Sovereign Emperor made a fatal oversight: he believed generals Balku, Gurko and Khabalov. It was this fatal oversight that became the starting point of the February palace coup. (...) This betrayal could be reproached to the Sovereign Emperor: why didn’t he foresee it? With exactly the same degree of logic one could reproach Caesar: why didn’t he provide for Brutus with his dagger?

Arrogant generals, who were largely nurtured and promoted by the Emperor, betrayed not only him, but the whole of Russia. Without much resistance they allowed themselves to be convinced of the need to overthrow the Tsar. They were even more willing to convince themselves that it was they, and not this boring “mediocre emperor” who was boring everyone, who should enter Berlin, Vienna and Constantinople as winners.

Nicholas II after his abdication. March 1917

By the way, a few words about Constantinople. It is often imagined that our “dreams” about Constantinople are some kind of great-power idiocy. Nothing like this. The main thing (this became especially clear after the defeat in the Crimean War) is that free permanent passage through the straits to the Mediterranean Sea for Russia is also the most important issue of national security, this is the most important economic factor. The Sykes-Picot Treaty was, on the one hand, a victory for Nicholas II, and on the other, the signature under this treaty was also the signature under the verdict on himself: our Western “partners” were not at all going to fulfill this agreement, for which there is a lot of written and very cynical evidence .

Within the framework of our conversation, of course, it is impossible to mention all or even many extremely important events, evidence and facts. This is Lord Milner’s visit to Petrograd, and the participation of American bankers, and the subversive, there is no other way to say it, activity of the Duma, and the helpless and then vile actions of many official monarchists, and a broad analysis of the government’s mistakes... Although about this, the last and most important we will talk at the end of our meeting.

The generals who wrote those very telegrams of renunciation to their emperor and commander-in-chief soon deeply repented. Alekseev said: “I will never forgive myself for believing that the abdication of Emperor Nicholas II would entail the good of Russia.” General Evert sobbed when he learned about the death of the royal family, and admitted to his wife: “No matter what they say, we are traitors - traitors to the oath, and we are to blame for all this.” Alekseev, with belated repentance, organized the white movement and died prematurely in Yekaterinodar from pneumonia.

General Ruzsky, a cruel and arrogant man who mercilessly humiliated Nicholas II in the hours of abdication, was stabbed to death by the Bolsheviks as a hostage in Pyatigorsk. General Alekseev died prematurely in Yekaterinodar from pneumonia. General Evert was shot by a red convoy in Mozhaisk in 1918. General Sakharov was shot by anarchists in Crimea. General Brusilov joined the Red Army and lived to be seventy-two years old in the service of the Bolsheviks, whom he hated. Leon Trotsky gloatingly, but, unfortunately, rightly later wrote:

“Among the command staff there was no one who would stand up for their king. Everyone was in a hurry to board the ship of the revolution in the firm expectation of finding cozy cabins there. Generals and admirals took off their royal monograms and put on red bows. Everyone saved themselves as best they could."

Pavel Milyukov, Minister of Foreign Affairs in the first Provisional Government of Prince Lvov, bitterly admitted: “History will curse our leaders, the so-called proletarians, but will also curse us, who caused the storm.”

There were many, many such belated repentances.

Russian enlightened society:« Let the Germans win, but not the Romanovs!»

Along with all this, we can say: there were English interests, there were French interests, there were German interests, there were our elites who strived for complete power, but, first of all, the engine of this revolution, all this lawlessness, was Russian society as a whole. Not only the fatal mistakes of the government, conspiracies, betrayals, and, in general, the undoubted diseases of the degradation of the aristocratic-noble monarchy influenced the events of the February Revolution, but most importantly - the complete support of society.

We must touch upon another extremely important and relevant topic - this is the Russian intelligent society, without whose active support the February events are unthinkable. In those days in Petrograd there was a man who, from my point of view, better than others saw and identified one of the deep reasons for the paradoxical and deadly opposition of society and government. In any case, that society, which is usually called enlightened, or more simply, our intelligentsia and semi-intelligentsia. This man was the Ambassador of the French Republic in Petrograd, Maurice Paleologue. This is what he said about us and what is important for us to comprehend and remember: “No people,” Maurice Paleologus concluded his observations of Russia, “is as easily influenced and inspired as the Russian people.”

The systemic “influences and suggestions” that were applied to society from the outside and from the inside had an enormous acceptance of these influences, an unprecedented sincerity in the civil response, and after this they were destructive for the country, for the people and, first of all, for the members of the “enlightened society” themselves. suicidal actions. These actions could extend from real terror, in which the participation of the “enlightened society”, the intelligentsia and nobles was generally dominant (Sofia Perovskaya, A. Ulyanov, many others), to essentially direct moral support from the intelligentsia for terror against state structures.

The striking results of spontaneous surveys of the then professors and students regarding whether the police should be informed about an impending terrorist act against officials are known: the general answer is “no.” Or, say, to the question: who would you shake hands with: a terrorist murderer or a minister, the general answer is “a terrorist.”

Russia at the beginning of the reign of Nikolai Alexandrovich was a country with a huge number of problems, the main one of which was the contradiction between government and society. The authorities have failed to find a common language with society. But society categorically did not want to find this common language. We know the results.

This behavior of society is characteristic of teenage consciousness, corresponds to the teenage period of human development, characterized by a complete lack of internal harmony, negativism, resistance to parents, educators, and elders. A blind break with the usual authorities, a capricious and painful desire for total independence in the absence of any real experience and sufficiently developed mental abilities. This teenage consciousness among our great Russian intelligentsia is a chronic and inescapable disease. At times she lets go, we become wiser after unheard of trials. But then again the chronic illness returns with renewed vigor, if not to everyone, then to a considerable part of our Russian society. Dostoevsky fully studied both the pathogenesis and course of this disease and described its course in its most advanced form in Raskolnikov’s third dream:

“Some new trichinae appeared, microscopic creatures that inhabited people’s bodies. But these creatures were spirits, gifted with intelligence and will. People who accepted them into themselves immediately became possessed and crazy. But never, never have people considered themselves as smart and unshakable in the truth as the infected believed. They have never considered their verdicts, their scientific conclusions, their moral convictions and beliefs more unshakable. Entire villages, entire cities and peoples became infected and went crazy. Everyone was in anxiety and did not understand each other, everyone thought that the truth lay in him alone, and he was tormented, looking at others, beating his chest, crying and wringing his hands. They didn’t know who to judge and how, they couldn’t agree on what to consider as evil and what as good. They didn’t know who to blame, who to justify. People killed each other in some senseless rage. Whole armies gathered against each other, but the armies, already on the march, suddenly began to torment themselves, the ranks were upset, the warriors rushed at each other, stabbed and cut, bit and ate each other. In the cities they sounded the alarm all day long: they called everyone, but who was calling and why, no one knew, and everyone was in alarm. They abandoned the most ordinary crafts, because everyone proposed their thoughts, their amendments, and they could not agree; Agriculture stopped. Here and there people gathered in heaps, agreed to something together, swore not to part, but immediately started something completely different from what they themselves had immediately intended, began to blame each other, fought and cut themselves.”

Doesn't remind you of anything?

In no country in the world has there been such a layer of educated society that would so fundamentally and constantly oppose any action of its state authorities. This teenage complex is the most important problem in Russian life. Moreover, to this day, groups and communities (regardless of their liberal or conservative orientation), obsessed with this kind of proud teenage consciousness, arrogantly imagine themselves to be the healthiest and only right representatives of the people.

One of the slogans of part of the intelligentsia during the First World War was: “Let the Germans win, but not the Romanovs!” Then they will mourn their former life in Paris, in Belgrade, clutch birch trees, shed tears, and then...

One example. I have a close friend - Zurab Mikhailovich Chavchavadze - from a princely family, the Russian pre-revolutionary elite. His mother, Maria Lvovna, who was about seventeen years old in 1917, said: they then lived in Tsarskoe Selo. One day, a neighbor, also an aristocrat from high society, came to visit for tea. And during the conversation, the guest uttered the following words: “Well, when will these scoundrels free us from their presence?” Maria Lvovna’s mother asked: “Who do you mean?” The guest replied: “These... Romanovs!” Then the mistress of the house stood up and said: “I ask you to leave my house and never come to us again.” Since then, their family has become an outcast in Tsarskoe Selo. They were boycotted. They became unable to shake hands. They stopped greeting them.

Now about the “suggestion”. And before the war, and especially during the war, the domestic press was flooded with a huge amount of the most vile and deceitful gossip. There were endless rumors that the Empress - German by birth - was a German spy, that the telegraph from Tsarskoe Selo was laid directly at Wilhelm's headquarters, the Empress was extracting all military secrets from her husband and informing the enemy. That is why, they said in horror and completely seriously, that is why our army is retreating. Everyone was convinced that Russia was ruled by a dirty, illiterate, depraved man - Rasputin. Through the empress, who blindly believes him and, moreover, is his mistress, he dictates his will to Nicholas. All of them were united by one stigma: “dark forces.” Living under the rule of such dark forces became truly unbearable. If you really believe in all this, of course. “Our indignant minds are seething!”

Unfortunately, the country, represented by its elite and then the common people, believed this. And how can you not believe it?! This was talked about out loud in high society salons, in the Duma, in teahouses, in ministries, in universities, at the fronts.

Workers' demonstration on February 2, 1917. Live caricature of Grigory Rasputin and Foreign Minister Alexander Protopopov

Soon after the February Revolution, the first Cheka in the new Russia was organized - the Extraordinary Commission of Inquiry. One of her secretaries, by the way, was Alexander Blok. The main task of the emergency commission of inquiry was to investigate and prepare for a national trial the highest-ranking criminals against the interests of Russia, primarily the characters of those very “dark forces”. One can imagine with what zeal and passion the investigators began this work entrusted to them by the people and the Provisional Government, the results of which seemed completely obvious to everyone: the whole country and even the whole world were talking about the anti-people and shameful in all respects activities of the leaders. After several months of interrogations, investigations, studying a huge amount of seized material, the commission found nothing, I emphasize - nothing - incriminating either the emperor, the empress, or their closest associates. The conclusions of this commission are available in the archives in the public domain, and anyone can view them.

More on the topic of the influence of Alexandra Feodorovna, and through her Rasputin, on her “henpecked” husband. Sergei Oldenburg discovered seventeen letters from the tsarina, in which she either gave advice to her husband, including during the war, or conveyed advice from “our friend,” that is, Rasputin. Indeed, there were such letters and such advice. But the emperor did not put any of them into practice, as was established by the investigators of the Extraordinary Investigation Commission, amazed by such a discovery.

And I’ll tell you a secret: it would be better if he listened!

Alexandra Feodorovna was an absolutely amazing person in our history. A German, raised at the court of the English queen, she became a true Russian and absorbed the best features of all the cultures and peoples who raised her. Coupled with a brilliant education and remarkable mind, all this made her one of the most insightful and wise-hearted women in Russia. You are amazed at her letters, specifically about advice to her husband. No matter the request, no matter the proposal, it’s what they call “top ten”! I quote the meaning from memory: “Close the Duma until the end of the war, it’s a hotbed of revolution there!” Arrest Guchkov, Ruzsky! (the main conspirators who seduced the front commanders). And so on and so forth…

Most of all, she resembles Cassandra - the ancient Greek mythological prophetess, whom no one believed, but whose predictions always came true. Nikolai Alexandrovich did not listen to her on principle.

The emperor was dominated by the inner conviction that he, endowed with some special charisma, should rule himself - autocratically. There was a considerable element of fatalism in this, which, in general, played a fatal role in many ways. This is a special conversation about how and why this particular idea of ​​​​royal power took root in us. But he was not even close to being the “henpecked” man of Alexandra Feodorovna and the “novice” of Rasputin.

As for Rasputin, he was also a special figure. Read the wonderful book “Grigory Rasputin-New” by the writer and rector of the Literary Institute Alexei Varlamov. This is a very solid study. Rasputin was a man, quite possibly ambiguous, but undoubtedly slandered. Slander against him, spread with enviable systematicity and on a huge scale, was one of the most effective tools to undermine the state system, discredit the authorities, and overthrow the prestige of the emperor and empress.

Rasputin with the royal family

Why was he accepted into the royal family? We know about this person’s ability to stop the heir’s illness. But there were other factors that made us think seriously.

Here is his letter from 1914, written on the eve of the war to the emperor. Listen:

“Dear friend, I’ll say it again: there’s a threatening cloud over Russia, there’s trouble, there’s a lot of dark grief and there’s no light. There is a sea of ​​tears - and there is no measure, but blood? What will I say? There are no words, indescribable horror. I know that everyone wants war from you - and the faithful, not knowing that they want it for the sake of death. God's punishment is severe when the mind is taken away - this is the beginning of the end. You are the king, the father of the people, do not allow the insane to triumph and destroy themselves and the people. They will defeat Germany, but what about Russia? To think that truly there was no more sufferer, she was all drowning in great blood, death without end, sadness.”

The autograph of the letter is at Yale University. What can I say?.. Rasputin is a mysterious figure in our history. We do not know everything about him, and perhaps we will only find out at the Judgment of God what kind of person he was. Is there any negative evidence? Eat. Is there evidence that is completely different? Without a doubt.

But let's return to enlightened Russian society. Remember, from Pushkin: “Oh, it’s not difficult to deceive me, I’m glad to be deceived myself!” Russian society willingly and, let's be honest, with joyful gloating succumbed to a systemic, well-thought-out deception regarding the actions of the emperor, creating an atmosphere of total rejection of Nicholas II in the country. The emperor was forced to abdicate, the “creative society” took power into its own hands and, in the person of the Provisional Government, which it enthusiastically accepted, with stupidity unprecedented in Holy Rus', ruined the country, preparing ideal conditions for the most inveterate and unprincipled extremists to come to power.

“One must be amazed with what readiness and irresponsibility, with what lack of patriotism and dignity, the Russian revolutionary intelligentsia left Russia to Western European experimenters and executioners” (I. Ilyin).

Then we partly came to our senses. After Lenin’s terror, after the carnage of the civil war, the Russian people began to come to their senses and, with unprecedented enthusiasm, create the only thing that we can and are accustomed to creating on the paths of state building - an empire. We created it - red, Soviet.

Summarizing the theme of Russian enlightened society, I will quote the words of a man who, on the eve of the February events, warned the Emperor about impending upheavals. Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich, a controversial figure, but undoubtedly an insightful and wise person, already in exile in Paris, wrote:

Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich

“The Romanov throne fell not under the pressure of the forerunners of the Soviets or young bombers, but bearers of aristocratic families, court titles, bankers, publishers, aristocrats, professors and other public figures living on the bounties of the empire. The Tsar would have been able to satisfy the needs of Russian workers and peasants, the police would have dealt with the terrorists, but it was completely in vain to try to please the numerous applicants for ministers, the revolutionaries recorded in the book of the most distinguished noble families, and the opposition bureaucrats educated in Russian universities.

What should have been done with those high-society Russian ladies who spent whole days traveling from house to house and spreading the most vile rumors about the Tsar and Tsarina? What should have been done in relation to those two scions of the oldest family of princes Dolgoruky, who joined the enemies of the monarchy? What should have been done with the rector of Moscow University, who turned this oldest Russian institution of higher education into a breeding ground for revolutionaries? What should have been done with Count Witte, Chairman of the Council of Ministers in 1905–1906, whose specialty was supplying newspaper reporters with scandalous stories discrediting the royal family? What should have been done with our newspapers, which greeted our failures on the Japanese front with glee?

What should have been done with the members of the State Duma, who with joyful faces listened to the gossip of slanderers who swore that there was a wireless telegraph between Tsarskoe Selo and Hindenburg’s headquarters? What should have been done with those commanders entrusted by the Tsar to the army, who were more interested in the growth of anti-monarchist aspirations in the rear of the army than in victory over the Germans at the front? A description of the anti-government activities of the Russian aristocracy and intelligentsia could fill a thick volume, which should be dedicated to emigrants mourning the good old days on the streets of European cities.”

And our society repeated its mistakes again

But society was not the only one to blame. Sovereign Nikolai Alexandrovich was an autocrat, he was responsible for his people and for his country. We honor him as a saint for his Christian life during his imprisonment. We pay tribute to his outstanding talent as a statesman, his amazing patience, sacrificial love and devotion to his people, their faith. He was a truly amazing man and, perhaps, the most tragic of the Russian sovereigns. But now, looking back at that period, we understand that we need such a historical analysis in order to carry out, as we conventionally said, “work on mistakes.” We began our conversation with the words of Vasily Osipovich Klyuchevsky. Coming to the end, let us remember one more of his thoughts: “Why do people so love to study their past, their history? Probably for the same reason why a person, having stumbled while running, likes to get up and look back at the place of his fall.”

In February - March 1917, the emperor acted, it seems, absolutely correctly - situationally, tactically. But what was missed by the tsarist government earlier? Where were the fundamental strategic mistakes that became fatal?

Emperor Nicholas II granted freedom to society, created a parliament, but at the same time failed to create a mechanism to control possible destruction. His governments could not overcome many and the most serious illnesses associated with the undoubted degradation of the aristocratic-noble monarchy.

Creating a new viable state mechanism in new conditions, in the conditions of parliamentary life, was an unusually difficult task, and it was all the more difficult because all this was for the first time: Russia did not yet have such experience.

Nikolai Alexandrovich won victories on the war fronts, undoubted victories in industrial and social construction, but suffered a crushing defeat in terms of consolidating society, in building creative work with a wide variety of elites, with the press, and suffered a defeat in the ideological field.

Nicholas II before his abdication. Fragment of a painting by artist V. Alekseev

To unite and develop the most diverse and contradictory parts of society, to inspire them with a single task, and ultimately to govern this society in the interests of the people and the state - this is what the tsarist government was unable to do.

And our society repeated its mistakes again in 1991. Again, total “teenage negativism”, again “to the ground, and then...”, the collapse of a great country, again poverty, humiliation, again the painful misfortunes of the people... This is again a manifestation of those very inescapable chronic diseases of ours. We must understand this, be soberly aware of this, and still learn lessons from the past.