1820 - Constitutional Russia, 2.0

  • Thread starter Deleted member 82118
  • Start date

Deleted member 82118

OTL, Emperor Alexander I of Russia several times was very close to transform Russia into a constitutional Monarchy. Historians still are not fully understood, why he rejected the VERY moderate project of Count Novosiltsev in 1820.
So, what if he approved this project.
P.S. I had already tried to start the story around a year ago, but failed. So, this is my second attempt.
 

Deleted member 82118

Alexander I wanted to to transform Russia into the Modern constitutional monarchy since the times of his boyhood as a Heir of the Throne. Finland and Poland under his rule got constitutions - in 1810 and 1815 rectectively. The work on the writing the Constitution for Russia restarted soon after Victory over Napoleon. The final text was written by close advisers and friends of the Emperor – Count Nicolay Novosiltsev, and Prince Pyotr Vyazemsky. 18 December 1820 Alexander signed the project of the State Charter of the Russian Empire . More or less, Charter copied many elements of the Polish Constitution of 1815, and Napoleonic Code.
426px-Alkruger.jpg

Alexander I, the first Constitutional Emperor of Russia
 

Deleted member 82118

According to the Charter,
-- Emperor saved much of his power, became Head of the both Executive and Legislative branches.

-- Russia was transformed into the Federal Constitutional Monarchy. Russia was divided into 15 Viceregencies. They are:

-- Viceregency of Baltic Lands with capital in Riga
-- Viceregency of Lithuania with capital in Vilno
-- Viceregency of Belorussia with capital in Smolensk
-- Viceregency of Malorossia with capital in Kiev
-- Viceregency of Novorossia with capital in Odessa
-- Viceregency of Don with capital in Novocherkassk
-- Viceregency of Tula
-- Viceregency of Tver
-- Viceregency of Caucasus with capital in Tiflis
-- Viceregency of Kazan
-- Viceregency of the North with capital in Arkhangelsk
-- Viceregency of Ural with capital in Perm
-- Viceregency of Siberia with capital in Tobolsk

1821подробно.png


St. Petersburg and Moscow were equated with Viceregencies in all but name.


Each Viceregency had own Duma, composed from the delegates from the Noble Assembles and City Dumas. So, only Nobility and Merchants could elect their delegates to Local Dumas (and Imperial Duma was created from delegates of the Local Dumas). Also, Jewish Merchants were deprived of suffrage.


-- executive power in the Empire goes to the State Council of ministers, headed by Emperor.


Ministries are:


- -Ministry of War
-- Ministry of Navy
-- Ministry of Justice
-- Ministry of Finances and Treasury
-- Ministry of the Revision of the Government accounts
-- Ministry of Religious Affairs and Education
-- Ministry of Police
-- Ministry of Interitor Affairs
-- Ministry of Foreign Affairs
-- Ministry of Communications

-- Legislative power was divided between Emperor and bicameral State Duma. Upper House of Duma – Senate – include members of the Romanov Dynasty, and dignitaries, appointed by the Emperor. Lower House of Zemsky Delegates – composed from the delegates from the local Dumas. House of Zemsky Delegates was elected every 5 years for month [later House started to work permanently]. Duma could proposed a Law, but only Emperor may adopt it.

-- Charter granted some basic rights and freedoms for all citizens of the Empire.

Among others:
-- Freedom of religion [with Russian Orthodox Church as the State Religion]
-- Equality of all before the law
-- Freedom of the press
-- the right to freely leave the country
-- the right to property is sacred
-- the right to arrest only on law
-- the mandatory liability of officials
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Intresting idea. I knew that Alexander I was quiet progressive but this is but unexpectable. What is situation of serfdom?
 

Deleted member 82118

Intresting idea. I knew that Alexander I was quiet progressive but this is but unexpectable. What is situation of serfdom?
In the text of the Charter there was literally no about peasants. Serfdom in Russia saved as in 1820, and in the future... spoilers!
 

Deleted member 82118

Interesting concept, but hadn't Alexander been drifting to always more conservative positions since 1814-1815?
Not at all. There was Polish Constitution in 1815, abolishing of serfdom in the Baltic lands in 1818, warious projects for reforms in Central Russia... Clearly conservative (and even reactionary) policy started since 1820-1822.
 

Deleted member 82118

Russian Imperial Duma Election of 1821 was not much interesting. Like as All-Russian Legislative Commission in 1767, Firs Duma was composed from independent delegates, but unlike Commission, only from Nobility [big part] and Merchants [lesser part].
1821.png



But debates during the first session were heated. Duma was divided by 2 main questions. Most sound – but useless – was debate about serfdom.

Николай Тургенев.jpg

Nicolay Turgenev - leader of the "Philantrops"

Карамзин.jpg

Nicolay Karamzin - Conservative Icon.

Nicolay Turgenev, delegate from Kazan, propose to “abolish this shame institute of Russian Slavery” did not meet with the understanding of the majority of the delegates. His opponent was famous writer, historic and conservator Nicolay Karamzin (ironically, also delegate from Kazan), who once made Speransky to fell. Karamzin saw: “Serfdom is the basis of the Russian society. Landlords helps their peasants in cause of bad harvest. Landlords build schools, hospitals, churches and roads in their lands. Landlords must do it, and peasants must work on the Landlord and give him a share of the crop”. And Nobility in Duma support Karamzin. In fact, only 20-30 delegates form 210 in Duma support Turgenev, with more then 100 support serfdom. Turgenev propose was failed.

300px-Karl_Brullov_05.jpeg


Alexander Golitsyn - all-heated Minister of Religious Affairs and Education

Second question to debate was the policy of Ministry of Religious Affairs and Education. There Duma Majority was united in condemnation of the current Minister, Mystic and Obscurantist Prince Alexander Golytsin. Minister was heated by everyone – by “Progressives” because of his ultra-reactionary actions, such as trying to ban the Roman Law and Classic Philosophy for “extremism”, by “Patriots” – due of his Liberal past and Protestant (mostly Quaker) sympathies. Duma couldn’t dismiss the Minister, but under it the pressing, Alexander I changed Golytsin to Conservative and Orthodox-sympathed Alexander Sishkov. Later, Ministry of Religious Affairs and Education was even divided in 2. [all us OTL, exept the fact, that the Holy Synod wasn’t rebuild TTL, but the Ministry of Religious Affairs was created].

Also heated debates were about the free trade question, but there powers of freetraders and protectionists were more or less equal.
Only one idea unite all delegates – idea, that Russia must help the Greeks, rebellious against the Ottoman Empire.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not at all. There was Polish Constitution in 1815, abolishing of serfdom in the Baltic lands in 1818, warious projects for reforms in Central Russia... Clearly conservative (and even reactionary) policy started since 1820-1822.
Oh, I see. My ideas was probably deformed by his foreign policy, especially during the later part of the Congress of Vienna.

That said I am enjoying your TL and I am eager to see how the Greek question will be handled and later on how and when the peasants will be emancipated.
With a (however very moderate) Constitution in place in Russia the position of the Holy Alliance is somewhat worse, maybe there won't be interventions against the constitutional regimes in Spain and Two Sicilies?
 

Deleted member 82118

With a (however very moderate) Constitution in place in Russia the position of the Holy Alliance is somewhat worse, maybe there won't be interventions against the constitutional regimes in Spain and Two Sicilies?

Well, situation in these two causes were very controversial. In fact, Lidach Congress agreed with the Neaples Constitution, and intervention was more Austrian work, that all Holy Alliance. Also, in cause of Spain, Louis XVIII of France was a very special guy, and he could send troops ever without HA approval. And the second moment - Constitution - it is good, but the main question for HA was the legitimacy of government. Even Revolution was, in HA eyes, a crime against the state. Constitution in Russia could not change anything here. Ever Greek rebels had promblems with law, in Alexander I eyes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Deleted member 82118

ΑλΥψηλ.jpg

Ypsilantis and members of the Filiki Eteria Society crossed the Prut river

In fact, Alexander I did not want to fight against Turkey. In his opinion, Sultan Mahmud was a legitimate monarch, and Greek leaders Alexander Ypsilantis and Theodoros Colokotronis – nasty rebels. At first, when Ypsilantis and Romanian leader Tudor Vladimirescu crossed the Prut in 1820, he ever ordered to stop any support of Greek rebels. But Russian society was mostly pro-Greek. Sympathy for the uprising grows ever high in early 1821, when the war lead to the Greek Pogroms started in Turkey. Constantinople Massacre of 22 April 1821, when Patriarch Gregory V was hanged by Ottomans at the central gate of the Patriarchate. This lead 160 members of Duma to sign a petition, asking to Emperor to start a was with Turkey, and “save our Orthodox brothers from extermination”. 14 July 1821, 1Russian army crossed the Ottoman border.

800px-Boevoj_epizod_1828-1829.jpg

Russian army sieged Silistra

Vryzakis-Stratopedo_Karaiskaiki.jpg

Greek army camp near Athens

After series of sieges, Russians took all main Ottoman Danubian Fortresses, include Silistra, to the end of 1821. Parallel with that, Greeks took control over Peloponnesus, Boeotia, Thessaly, Crete, and most of the Aegean islands, and Tudor Vladimiresku with the Russian help took control over Wallachia and Moldova. Next stage of war waswas the audacious general Mikhail Vorontsov’s winter march through the Balkan Mountains to the Constantinople, lead to Adrianople Peace treaty of 18 April 1822.

новые государства на Балканах 1825.png

Balkans after the War

Ottoman Empire had to recognize full independence of Greece (include Morea, Attica, Boeotia, Thessaly, Crete, and Aegean), Romania (Wallachia+Moldova, and former Ottoman lands of Dobrodea ), Serbia and Montenegro. Also, Turkey passed to Russia their fortress in the Caucasian Coast – Anapa, Sudzhuk-Kale, Sochi and Adler.

Tudor_Vladimirescu.jpg
Александр Ипсиланти.jpg
MILOSH_OBRENOVICH_I5.jpg

Tudor Vladimiresku, Governor of Romania Alexandres Ypsilantis, President of Greece Miloc Obrenovic, Prince of Serbia


It was a hard problem with the Governments in this new states. Only Montenegro had an international-recognized Monarchy. For Holy Alliance, Ypsilanis in Greece, Vladimirescu in Romania, and Milos Obrenovic in Serbia were illegitimate tyrants. So, the question was – what to do with that. Replace the Obrenovic was not possible, but for Greece and Romania Carlsbad Congress of 1825 decided to find a Legitimate Monarchs, dynastically connected with the Byzantine Empire. Also Congress decided, that the Russian Candidate will de the Romanian King, and Austrian Candidate – a Greek one.

fantasma34.jpg
Prince_Karl_Theodor_of_Bavaria.jpg

King Alexandru I of Romania King Theodoros I of Greece

Finally, the Alexandru Cantacusino, a Fanariote Greek Nobleman and a General in a Greek Independence War , descended from Moldovan Voivodas, and, probably, from Byzantine House of Kantakouzenos, was chosen for Romania, and Bavarian prince Theodor Wittelsbach, descended from Byzantine House of Laskaris – for Greece. Both took their thrones in 1826.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Deleted member 82118

Николай 1 1825-1856.jpg

Nicolay I, Emperor of All Russia (1825-1860)

End of 1825 was remarkable because of the death of the Emperor Alexander I. By his last will, throne goes to his second brother, Nicolay I, because heir of the throne, Tsesarevch Constantine, Viceroy in the Kingdom of Poland, renounce his right in 1818. [unlike OTL, TTL the Constantine’s decision was not in secret, so TTL was no succession controversy and Decembrist Revolt ]. Emperor Nicolay I political credo was seen controversial. In one hand, he was the fanatic of “Order and Discipline”, saw a Nation as the body need to be well organized – as an Army is. At the another side, he was very just man, and ruled, according by the laws –include the Charter. Later historians saw him as a technocrat, who, personally opposed Liberal Ideas, did much to transform Russia, Poland and Finland into a true Constitutional Monarchies.

1826.png


1826 Imperial Duma Election Results


Duma election of 1826 saw the first political parties fight for the Imperial Duma Mandates. Election mostly was not so interesting – Conservative Russian Landowners Union controlled all Local Dumas, effectively bloke opponents from ability to send delegates to the Petersburg. Emperor Nicolay I opened the session with his famous “We – I and You – all are servants of the Russia’’ statement.

One of the first Nicolay I reforms was transform Imperial Duma into a permanent legislative body. Since the 1831, Duma was elected for 5 years, rather than “for 30 days every 5 years”. Also, Nicolay ordered to create Duma Committees. This parts of the Imperial Duma developed a plan for the reforms in a several sectors. First Committees are – Peasant’s, Financial and Legal. Also, Nicolay reorganized the Ministry of Police into the well-prepared and powerful structure, leaded by 1812 War hero, and Nicolay I personal Friend, Count Alexander von Benkendorf.

1831.png

1831 Imperial Duma Election Results

Election of 1831 had a different situation, with Tariffs question divide Duma, and Free Trade “Progressive” party (in coalition with the Poles), form a majority, with Free Traders leader, and Russian-Ottoman War Hero, Count Mikhail Vorontsov, elected a Duma Chairman.
In 1832, Legal Committee of thee Imperial Duma, leaded by count Mikhail Speransky, finished the work over the fundamental Digest of Laws of the Russian Empire. Economical reform started slowly, due to Free Traders and Protectionists squabbles. This reform could be completed to the 1836, but the American War changed the plans.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Deleted member 82118

Павел Пестель.jpg

Paul Pestel (1793-1866) - General, Conspirator, and the Author of the "Russian Law"

Another Russian-Ottoman War hero, General Paul Pestel, also want down in history, but through another way. Definite Republican, Pestel was the member of various Secret Societies since 1815. In 1828, he was almost arrested, and had to flee abroad. In 1834, he published his book, “Russian Law’, in London. Had written as the instruction to the future Revolutionary Government of Russia, “Russian Law’ became a sensation, and was known as the first – and main – book of the Political Rationalism.
Main Ideas of Pestel are:

-- human rights are not important in themselves, but only if they help a Nation to been stronger.
-- the main tasks of the Government are Security (at first), and Welfare of citizens
-- Government must have strong Security Forces, and carry out propaganda
-- Nation Government must be strong, centralized and powerful
-- old estates structure has no place in modern society. Aristocracy must die.
-- Capitalists in perspective not better, that Aristocrats. Government must keep Big Business out on politics
-- National state must be ethnically homogeneous. Minorities must be assimilated or annihilated.
-- Jews are not assimilatable, so they are enemy of Every National State. Jews must be expelled from the National State.
-- National state should not expand endlessly. National borders must be easy for defending.
 

Deleted member 82118

So Pestelian Rationaislm is some kind of proto-fascism?
both "yes" and "no". The major diference was that OTL Fascism was an anti-liberal, and anti-socialism movement, TTL Rationalism is sometimes radical form of the National Liberalism. But yes, practices are wery close.
 

Deleted member 82118

египет.jpg

Mohammed Ali as the Father of the Modern Egypt

Since 1805, when Albanian General Mohammed Ali took control over Egypt, relationships between Cairo and Constantinople were complicated. Muhammad Ali's [de-jure, he was only a wadi, Governor of the Ottoman province of Egypt ] goal was for Egypt to leave the Ottoman Empire and be ruled by his own hereditary dynasty. To do that, he had to reorganize Egyptian society, streamline the economy, train a professional bureaucracy, and build a modern military. And – with the help of France – he was successful in many of his innovations. To the end of 1820-s, Egypt was de-facto independent nation, with fast-growth economy. Mohammed Ali did not help his Ottoman suzerain against Russia [unlike OTL]. Finally, Sultan Mahmud became sick of it. In 1830, he ordered Mohammed Ali to resign. Mohammed Ali ignored the order, and Ottoman army attack Egypt.
Many historians saw this war as the first modern war in Asia. Both Turkey and Egypt reformed their armies since the early 1800-s, and both sides troops were mostly europized, and often leaded by the European officers (ironicaly, most of them are French – in both armies). Eventually, Mohammed Ali defeated Ottoman Army near Alexandria and invade Syria. Jerusalem Treaty of 1832 ended the war with clearly Egypt victory. Constantinople had to recognize the Egypt sovereignty. Jerusalem Treaty start an era of the Egypt great regional power status – era, lasted until the First Great War.
 
Ya know, I was toying around the idea of a Constitutionalist Russia under the helm of Aleksandr I in my head (Partially under the guise of one of Aleksandr's children being born a boy and surviving.) Glad someone went to jump at it before I did.
 

Deleted member 82118

Дмитрий Завалишин.jpeg

Dmitry Zavalishin, a "Russian Pizarro"

Dmitry Zavalishin was an Russian Naval Officer and adventurer. He travelled to the Russian America several times, and his dream was to expand the Russian territory to California. On his mind, Russian California would allowed to Russian America to be transformed from tiny-settled territory-for-sea ape-hunting to settler colony, and, in a perspective, to a new Russian Viceregency. Zavalishin could be convincing enough to made Russian American Company help him.

fort-ross-3.jpg

Fort Ross, the Russian American Company fortress in California, and Zavalishin's base.

18 May 1834, Zavalishin landed in Fort Ross (the only Russian settlement in California), with squad of the RAK soldiers and Cossacks. He crossed the Mexican border and easy took Yerba Buena – town near Fort Ross, almost not fortified. Next he went south, enlisted the support of the Natives.
News about Zavalishin attack reached Mexico City only month after the war started. Zavalishin won the time, accumulated powers, and 21 August 1834 something nearly impossible happened – 2000 Zavalishin and Comanche men defeats Mexican Army leaded by President Santa Ana in battle. After the Santa Ana defeated, Mexico falls into chaos. North was controlled by RAC – directly, or by puppet Zavalishin-lead California Republic. In the central regions, the Civil War started. Some states declares independence, such as Yucatan or Rio Grande .

Retrato_del_teniente_general_Diego_de_León,_conde_de_Belascoain.jpeg

Diego de Leon, crushing the Rebel Navarre, and want to re-conqer the Rebel Mexico

Victory gives some Russian Generals the Idea to conquer all of Mexico and restore the Spanish monarchy there. Nicolay I took the decision to intervene to Mexico in early 1838. diplomatic correspondence with Spain and war preparations took a year more, and in the middle of 1839, the war started. 30000 Spanish Soldiers from Cuba, leaded by Carlist War Hero, General Diego de Leon, landed in Mexico, Zavalishin with 10000 Soldiers, Cossacks and Native warriors moved to the south. Mexico was doomed… but these in Washington and London thought differently.
631px-Political_divisions_of_Mexico_1839.png

1839 - Mexico in ruins
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Very interesting so far. Not only is Russia drastically different than IOTL. But now it would seem that they are in the colonial game big time. I was not expecting a Russian invasion of Mexico!
 
Top