Russia Against Napoleon (90 page)

44 On Karneev, see RGVIA, Fond 489, Ed. Khr. 1, fo. 506: ‘Formuliarnyi spisok leib gvardii Preobrazhenskago polka, generalam, shtab i ober ofitseram i drugim chinam’, dated 1 Jan. 1808 (OS). On the Briansk, Narva and Grenadier regiments, see the sections on NCOs in their personnel records listed in n. 39 above. On soldiers’ sons and NCOs, see
Komplektovanie
, SVM, pp. 173–208. On Russian NCOs, see D. G. Tselerungo, ‘Boevoi opyt unter-ofitserov russkoi armii – uchastnikov Borodinskago srazheniia’, in
Otechestvennaia voina
1812
goda: Istochniki, pamiatniki, problemy. Materialy XII vserossisskoi nauchnoi konferentsii. Borodino,
6–8
sentiabria
2004
g
., Moscow, 2005, pp. 21–6.

45 Much the best evaluation of the Russian army’s performance in 1805–7 is in vol. 1 of Zhmodikov,
Tactics
.

46 Eugen,
Memoiren
, vol. 1, p. 136.

47 This information comes from the biographical sketch which introduced Osten-Sacken’s own diaries when these were published by
Russkii arkhiv
in 1900:
RA
, 1, 1900, pp. 6–25.

48 ‘Iz zapisok fel’dmarshala Sakena’,
RA
, 1, 1900, pp. 161–80. Langeron’s memoirs are a useful source on this dispute, since he had a healthy respect for both Bennigsen and Sacken. Langeron’s letter to Bennigsen, dated 10 Dec. 1816, is in vol. 1, pp. xxvii–xxix, of
Mémoires du Général Bennigsen
, 3 vols., Paris, n.d. The comments in his own memoirs are in
Mémoires de Langeron, Général d’Infanterie dans l’Armée Russe: Campagnes de 1812, 1813, 1814
, Paris, 1902, pp. 15–18.

49 The best source on the views of both Alexander and his advisers is the many letters of Prince Aleksandr Kurakin to the Dowager Empress Marie, in
RA
, 1, 1868. See also A. Gielgud (ed.),
Memoirs of Prince Adam Czartoryski
, 2 vols., London, 1888, vol. 2, pp. 174–83. V. Sirotkin,
Napoleon i Aleksandr I
, Moscow, 2003, is a good introduction to opinion within the Russian ruling elite on foreign policy.

50 S. Tatishcheff,
Alexandre I et Napoléon
, Paris, 1894, Alexander to Lobanov, 4/16 June 1807, p. 121.

51 D. N. Shilov,
Gosudarstvennye deiateli Rossiiskoi imperii
, SPB, 2001, pp. 377–9. Grand Duke Nikolai Mikhailovich,
Russkie portrety
, SPB, n.d., vol. 4, part 1, no. 62.

52 On Aleksandr Kurakin’s career, see S. N. Shipov and Iu. A. Kuz’min,
Chleny gosudarstvennogo soveta Rossiiskoi imperii
, SPB, 2007, pp. 412–16. Lobanov’s reports on the initial negotiations are in
RS
, 98, 1899, pp. 594–5, Lobanov to Alexander, 7/19 June 1807. See also
RA
, 1, 1868, Kurakin to Empress Marie, 10/22 June 1807, pp. 183–7.

53 It seems that in his initial drafts Tolstoy depicted the Kuragins in more sympathetic terms: K. B. Feuer,
Tolstoy and the Genesis of War and Peace
, Ithaca, NY, 1976, p. 71. On the ancestry of Lobanov and Kurakin, see N. Ikonnikov,
La Noblesse de Russie
, 2nd edn., vols. A1–Z2, Paris, 1958–66: vols. H1, pp. 211–16 and I1, pp. 426–31.

54 On Constantine, see E. Karnovich,
Tsesarevich Konstantin Pavlovich
, SPB, 1899. On Paul, see R. McGrew,
Paul I of Russia
, Oxford, 1992, and H. Ragsdale (ed.),
Paul I: A Reassessment of his Life and Reign
, Pittsburgh, 1979.

55 V. I. Genishta and A. T. Borisovich,
Istoriia 30-go dragunskago Ingermanlandskago polka
1704–1904, SPB, 1904, pp. 119–21, describes Lieven’s role in preparing the army for the 1805 campaign.

56 Lieven’s personnel record is in RGVIA, Fond 489, Opis 1, Delo 7062, fo. 356: as was true of many officers, he omitted to mention his parents’ property. See his self-appraisal in a letter to his fiancée, Dorothea, who was the god-daughter of the Empress Marie: J. Charmley,
The Princess and the Politicians
, London, 2005, p. 7.

57 S. W. Jackman (ed.),
Romanov Relations
, London, 1969, Grand Duchess Anna to Grand Duke Constantine, 2 April 1828, p. 149.

58 See e.g. Tatishcheff,
Alexandre
, pp. 140, 183, and A. Vandal,
Napoléon et Alexandre Premier
, 3 vols., Paris, 1891, vol. 1, pp. 61–7. The instructions are in
VPR
, 1st series, 3, note 414, pp. 754–60.

59 Alexander did relinquish the Ionian Islands and Cattaro, which Russia could in any case never defend once at war with the Ottomans and Britain. It received the more useful Belostok district in return.

60 The treaties of peace and alliance are in
VPR
, 1st series, vol. 3, nos. 257 and 258, pp. 631 ff.

61 These comments on Alexander’s preferences and perceptions are drawn from the instructions he gave to Kurakin and Lobanov:
VPR
, 1st series, vol. 3, note 414, pp. 754–60.

62 For a list of regimental artisans, see I. Ul’ianov,
Reguliarnaia pekhota
1801–1855, vol. 2, Moscow, 1996, p. 212. On the Church in the army, see L. V. Mel’nikova,
Armiia i pravoslavnaia tserkov’ Rossiiskoi imperii v epokhu Napoleonovskikh voin
, Moscow, 2007, pp. 45–56, 116–37.

63 The key work on officers’ profiles is Tselerungo,
Ofitsery russkoi armii
.

64 The information on the Preobrazhenskys comes from: RGVIA, Fond 489, Opis 1, Ed. Khr. 1, fos. 455–560: ‘Formuliarnyi spisok leib gvardii Preobrazhenskago polka, generalam, shtab i ober ofitseram i drugim chinam’, dated 1 Jan. 1808. Only occasionally in the personnel records of line regiments can one spot that officers have neglected to mention serf-owning: see for one example the three Dolzhikov brothers in the Narva Dragoons who had family serfs as orderlies: RGVIA, Fond 489, Opis 1, Ed. Khr. 2457, ‘Spisok o sluzhbe…Narvskago dragunskago polka’, fos. 95 ff. for the list of batmen and lines 6 ff. and 27 ff. for the personnel records of the brothers. It is much easier to spot omissions among the prominent officers of the Preobrazhensky officers, let alone in the generals’ personnel records in Fond 489, Opis 1, Delo 7602.

65 The quote is from
Zapiski Sergeia Grigorovicha Volkonskago (dekabrista)
, SPB, 1902, p. 70. See e.g. L. G. Beskrovnyi (ed.),
Dnevnik Aleksandra Chicherina,
1812–1813, Moscow, 1966, for excellent insights into the cultured young Guards officers’ mentality. Two such strikes were in the Semenovskys on the eve of 1812 and in the Guards artillery in January 1814: P. Pototskii,
Istoriia gvardeiskoi artillerii
, SPB, 1896, pp. 285–6;
Dnevnik Pavla Pushchina
, Leningrad, 1987, pp. 49–50.

66 On Lazarev, see http:www.svoboda.org/programs. For examples of ex-rankers being censured for poor behaviour after the war, see e.g. the cases of lieutenants Beliankin and Kirsanov of the 45th Jaegers (RGVIA, Fond 489, Opis 1, Delo 1855, fos. 19–20) or of three officers of the Iamburg Lancers (Lt. Krestovskii,
Istoriia 14-go Ulanskago Iamburgskago E.I.V. velikoi kniagini Marii Aleksandrovny polka
, SPB, 1873, appendices). Of course, many ex-rankers flourished.

67 ‘Imperator Aleksandr I: Ego kharakteristika po sochineniiu N. K. Shil’dera’,
RS
, 99/3, 1899, pp. 98–114, at p. 99.

68 The catalogue of the excellent recent exhibition at the Hermitage on Alexander contains articles with many insights into his personality:
Aleksandr I: ‘Sfinks ne razgadannyi do groba’
, SPB, 2005.

69 Quoted in N. Shil’der,
Imperator Aleksandr pervyi: Ego zhizn’ i tsarstvovanie
, 4 vols., SPB, 1897, vol. 3, a letter to Alexander from Professor Parrot, p. 489.

70 D. V. Solov’eva (ed.),
Graf Zhozef de Mestr: Peterburgskie pis’ma
, SPB, 1995, no. 72, de Maistre to de Rossi, 20 Jan./1 Feb. 1808, p. 99.

71 There is a dearth of work on provincial society and administration under Alexander. The reign of Catherine II and the period from the 1861 Emancipation to 1917 are much better covered. For a good overview of local administration, see Janet Hartley, ‘Provincial and Local Government’, in Lieven (ed.),
Cambridge History of Russia
, vol. 2, pp. 446–67.

72 The book which best expresses Alexander’s dilemmas is S. V. Mironenko,
Samoderzhavie i reformy: Politicheskaia bor’ba v Rossii v nachale XIX v.
, Moscow, 1989.

73 Metternich to Hardenberg, 5 Oct. 1812, in W. Oncken,
Österreich und Preussen in Befreiungskriege
, Berlin, 1878, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 378–80.

74
RD
, 5, no. 520, Caulaincourt to Champagny, 19 Sept. 1810, pp. 138–40.

Chapter 3: The Russo-French Alliance

1 N. F. Dubrovin, ‘Russkaia zhizn’ v nachale XIX v.’,
RS
, 29/96, 1898, pp. 481–516.

2
RD
, 4, no. 334, Caulaincourt to Champagny, 3 Oct. 1809, pp. 110–16.

3 e.g.
RD
, 1, no. 52, Caulaincourt to Champagny, 25 Feb. 1808, pp. 161–74; 2, no. 165, Caulaincourt to Napoleon, 8 Sept. 1808, pp. 344–6; 3, no. 187, Caulaincourt to Champagny, 15 Jan. 1809, pp. 27–32.

4
Zapiski Sergeia Grigorovicha Volkonskago (dekabrista)
, SPB, 1902, pp. 60–62.

5 A. Vandal,
Napoléon et Alexandre Premier
, 3 vols., Paris, 1891, vol. 1, pp. 196–7.
SIRIO
, 89, 1893, no. 15, Tolstoy to Rumiantsev, 26 Oct./7 Nov. 1807, pp. 183–5; no. 86, Tolstoy to Alexander, Dec. 1807, pp. 312–13; no. 111, Tolstoy to Rumiantsev, 25 April/7 May 1808, pp. 519–27.

6
Correspondance de l’Empereur Alexandre
, no. 12, Catherine to Alexander, 25 June 1807, pp. 18–19. On the French émigrés in Russia, see André Ratchinski,
Napoléon et Alexandre Ier
, Paris, 2002.

7
VPR
, 4, no. 219, Stroganov to Alexander, 1/13 Feb. 1809, pp. 490–91.

8 On Mordvinov, see e.g.
AGM
, 4, pp. xliv–xlv: see in particular his memorandum on the Continental System dated 25 Sept. 1811 (OS), pp. 479–86. For Gurev’s statement, see C. F. Adams (ed.),
John Quincy Adams in Russia
, New York, 1970, p. 277. Since official policy on the surface remained committed to the French alliance until the moment Napoleon crossed the border, diplomats usually camouflaged this view. The main but by no means only exception was Petr Tolstoy, who was already arguing for rapprochement with Britain as early as the summer of 1808. See e.g.
SIRIO
, 89, 1893, no. 111, Tolstoy to Rumiantsev, 25 April/7 May 1808, pp. 519–27; no. 176, Tolstoy to Rumiantsev, 26 July/7 Aug. 1808, pp. 631–5. But see also e.g.
VPR
, 4, no. 101, Alopaeus to Rumiantsev, 18/30 April 1808, pp. 233–5, for just one of many examples of other Russian diplomats expressing very ‘Tolstoyan’ views.

9
Mémoires du Général Bennigsen
, 3 vols., Paris, n.d., vol. 1, 4th letter, pp. 33–52; vol. 3, annex 53, pp. 377–95.

10 The main English-language source on Speransky remains Marc Raeff’s classic
Mikhail Speransky: Statesman of Imperial Russia
, The Hague, 1969, but at the very least the anglophone reader should also turn to John Gooding, ‘The Liberalism of Michael Speransky’,
Slavonic and East European Review
, 64/3, 1986, pp. 401–24.

11 For de Maistre’s views, see D. V. Solov’eva (ed.),
Graf Zhozef de Mestr: Peterburgskie pis’ma
, SPB, 1995, no. 72, de Maistre to de Rossi, 20 Jan./1 Feb. 1808, pp. 98–101. For Caulaincourt, see
RD
, 1, no. 18, Caulaincourt to Napoleon, 13 Jan. 1808, pp. 48–51. Count A. de Nesselrode (ed.),
Lettres et papiers du Chancelier Comte de Nesselrode
1760–1850, Paris, n.d., vol. 3, Nesselrode to Speransky, 2/14 April 1810, pp. 251–2. See also Joanna Woods,
The Commissioner’s Daughter: The Story of Elizabeth Proby and Admiral Chichagov
, Witney, 2000.

12
RA
, 2, 1876, Prozorovsky to Golitsyn, 23 July/4 Aug. 1807, pp. 157–9. On the British angle, see Brendan Simms,
Three Victories and a Defeat: The Rise and Fall of the First British Empire,
1714–1783, London, 2007.