Home page | Archive | The content of the number
Number 10(321) May 14, 2003
Margarita DUKHANINA (Moscow)
Elizabeth I Tudor: A HISTORY OF ILLUSIONS*
3.
«VIRGIN QUEEN»1
Elizabeth's persistent unwillingness to marry is another mystery of this reign.
Historians have tried to solve it countless times.
The most common version is Elizabeth's unwillingness to share power with her husband, the desire to maintain full political independence.
However, we will immediately make a reservation: in all the numerous marriage projects that were started by Elizabeth and her entourage, a mandatory condition of the marriage contract was the husband's refusal to rule.
That is, initially, Elizabeth was not looking for a co ruler, but only a manufacturer: England needed an heir, not a king.
There is another point of view: Elizabeth did not marry because she suspected of her infertility (and, therefore, marriage would not solve the problem of a successor).
This suspicion was based on very vague reasons: her half sister, Maria, suffered from infertility, and Elizabeth allegedly believed that there was a certain hereditary disease in their family.
The version that is questioned primarily by the evidence of contemporaries (the Spanish ambassadors, whose suzerain was more interested in the state of affairs in England than others, repeatedly found out, bribing various people — doctors, laundresses, etc., that the queen was capable of childbirth).
However, on the basis of what such assurances were made, it is unknown, because the only reliable fact — the fact that Elizabeth did not suffer from a violation of the menstrual cycle — still does not say anything.
Finally, the most radical version, which spread at the turn of the 1920s and 30s, when there was a craze for Freudianism in Europe, claims that Elizabeth was indeed, literally, a virgin queen, since some physiological features of her body did not allow her to enter into a close relationship with a man.
What these "physiological features" are is also unknown.
It seems that these" features "were meant by Mary Stuart in her famous "accusatory" letter to Elizabeth, where she calls her "not like all women", incapable of marriage, because "it can never be".
The first of the researchers, the point of view about the "physical inferiority" of the queen was voiced by Gregorio Leti in the middle of the 17th century ("The Story of Queen Elizabeth of England"), then Giles Lytton Strachey ("Queen Elizabeth and the Earl of Essex",1928), and finally, Stefan Zweig ("Mary Stuart", 1932), the version about the forced "virginity" of the queen unfolded completely, turning almost into the main engine of the plot.
Thanks to the great popularity of Zweig's book, this version later became widely used in all sorts of near scientific and especially literary circles — it gave Elizabeth's personality an additional drama.
In our opinion, all the above points of view on the celibacy of the queen suffer from excessive romanticism.
Perhaps the explanation is much simpler and more convincing: her unwillingness to marry is nothing more than a well — thought out political move.
Elizabeth liked to repeat that she was "married to England"; in fact, the so called "marriage games" at court turned almost into her main weapon through the queen's efforts.
The matchmaking of foreign princes kept the opposing countries in constant tension, because Elizabeth's marriage (if it had taken place) it was able to upset the political balance in Europe and create a completely different balance of forces.
The Queen used it.
Not intending to get married, she, nevertheless, was almost constantly in a state of "betrothal" with one or another applicant: for example, the matchmaking of the French Duke of Alencon lasted not many, not a few — 10 years (from 1572 to 1582!); depending on the political situation in France and Spain, Elizabeth then approached, then distanced the applicant, forcing Catherine de ' Medici (regent in France) and Philip II (king of Spain) to worry pretty much, because the possible marriage of the English queen and the French prince would have pretty much undermined the possibility of peaceful coexistence between the Valois and the Habsburgs.
Robert Lester
Not getting married was also advantageous from another point of view.
The Virgin Queen had an unlimited opportunity to charm her advisers and courtiers with her personal charm.
Men who were in love with her became more submissive and turned into more reliable assistants.
However, Elizabeth was not particularly deluded on this score: loving flattery, she, nevertheless, knew the true value of everything; "falling in love" alone was not enough here, and in the hearts of courtiers, as well as foreign princes, there was hope for marriage with the illustrious lady.
In different years, this hope was cherished by such notable English nobles as Pickering, Arundel; Lester.
In every possible way inflaming the desires in the minds and hearts of men, Elizabeth never once thought about marriage seriously ("Rather a lonely beggar than a married queen!" - these are her words).
Having come too close to the monstrous, unthinking male pride and vanity, she could not help but despise men.
In their servility to her, they reached the point of absurdity (for example, one provincial nobleman, a certain Kargli, voluntarily agreed to the role of a buffoon at court) — but only if they hoped for mercy from her.
As soon as she loosened the reins a little, men instantly forgot about their unearthly love (her favorite, Earl Robert Leicester, when Elizabeth fell seriously ill with smallpox, was impatiently waiting for her death, accompanied by several thousand armed henchmen, hoping to seize power).
To achieve their goal, the men around her did not take into account anything: they had neither firm political beliefs nor moral principles.
The same Leicester at the very beginning of the 1560s, when his hopes of getting Elizabeth to marry began to rapidly melt, concluded an unseemly deal with Philip II behind the monarch's back: if the latter supports his marriage with the queen, Leicester undertakes to defend Spanish interests in England and rule the country in accordance with these interests.
This smacked of high treason; of course, the Queen became aware of his audacious plans, and Leicester was not punished just because he was still needed.
However, after this incident, he could forget about the possibility of marriage with Elizabeth.
She no longer trusted "dear Robert", however, his pride never allowed him to admit this evidence.
Elizabeth could not marry an Englishman, because she did not find a worthy one.
State considerations and her own cowardice prevented her from marrying a foreign prince: as already indicated, she was afraid of the foreign policy consequences of such a step.
In other words, she was afraid to choose.
William Cecil
The only man at court who enjoyed the Queen's real and unwavering respect was William Cecil.
Having a beautiful strong family, he never dragged himself after Elizabeth and did not try to please her as a man.
He was brave enough to disagree with her, and smart enough to pretend to agree.
His firm political beliefs allowed him to maintain a constant clear position.
He was reliable and loyal.
He was rich, prudent and honest, and all attempts by the queen's enemies to bribe him with money failed ignominiously.
Who knows, perhaps the queen sincerely believed that only this man could become a worthy husband for her, because "she had seen only his face for so many years, and he still could not get tired of her."
However, even here we are forced to make a reservation: despite her sincere sympathy for Cecil, Elizabeth paid him humiliatingly little.
He complained in letters to friends that the state allowance was barely enough for him to maintain the stables, and he was forced to live on his ancestral estates and get into debt.
In 20 years of service to Elizabeth, he did not receive what he received from King Edward in four years (generosity, alas, was not included in the list of virtues of the queen).
The unmarried queen also met her main goal: to preserve her own life, because contrary to the national interests, Elizabeth did not need an heir at all.
The absence of the named receiver did not allow intrigue in favor of a particular person and did not create precedents for plots against Elizabeth.
The absence of an heir was her main — and best!
- personal guarantee, a patent for power.
But it was also an unsolvable problem for the state.
The queen was often ill, sometimes so seriously that her subjects were seized with a state close to panic.
At the same time, the situation in the state began to look very much like the pre war one: numerous factions and parties intended to firmly grasp power.
I must say that the disadvantages of the position of the "virgin queen" almost outweighed the advantages.
The personal interest of the entourage in the" special favor " of the queen created an unhealthy, nervous atmosphere of constant rivalry, general hatred and monstrous squabbles at the court.
Everyone was scheming and playing up to each other.
Due to the fact that the queen had "personal relations" with each man, factional conflicts, skirmishes and hostility at the court did not stop for a day, which, of course, extremely destabilized the overall political situation in the state.
The emotional level of communication between the monarch and his subordinates led to the fact that small and large conspiracies constantly broke out at the court, which, of course, undermined the personal security of the queen.
However, she was a hostage of her own (and absolute) distrust of men, which did not allow her to choose one of them and thereby put an end to dangerous intrigues.
She preferred to have more obstinate subjects in love than obstinate non lovers.
Perhaps the most significant drawback of her declared virginity was the lack of understanding on the part of the people.
Indeed, the pretentious and far fetched ideals that Elizabeth chose for herself as a woman would have suited a Catholic nun, but certainly not the first bride of England.
In the eyes of ordinary people, the queen was not only a queen, a ruler, but also a woman, and a woman who was absolutely incomprehensible from the point of view of common sense: she refused to marry and have children.
The people tried to solve this riddle according to their own understanding: there were many very different, often unpleasant rumors about Elizabeth.
Her unmarriage was explained in two ways: she was either a "libertine", or "something is wrong with her".
The first version in particular undermined the authority of the queen among ordinary people and generated active disrespect and unhealthy fantasies: the queen was attributed to an irrepressible sensuality and a lot of children of bastards.
The second statement was also very unflattering for the prestige of the crown: the most fantastic rumors about Elizabeth's physical deformity originate from there.
Finally, the very concept of "Virgin Queen" led other hotheads too far into the beyond: in 1587, a certain Emmanuel Plantagenet — "the son of Queen Elizabeth from the immaculate conception", caught by secret agents right on the streets of London, was delivered to the astonished Cecil.
The poor madman might have been pitied if this sublime idea had not been fueled by the conviction that "his power in heaven is higher than the archangel Gabriel," and therefore that Emmanuel Plantagenet has earthly power!
Elizabeth was fully aware that her position as a virgin queen brought too many problems to England, the most obvious of which was the absolutely insoluble problem of the heir.
However, she did absolutely nothing to change the situation.
4. THE DEATH OF THE "INVINCIBLE ARMADA"
Philip II
The international situation in the world in the second half of the XVI century was extremely confusing.
Armed conflicts between Catholics and Protestants were spreading everywhere, in other countries (France, the Netherlands) resulting in real religious wars.
The leadership in the world was firmly held by Spain, which actively waged aggressive wars, having conquered Portugal, part of Italy, and the Netherlands.
The Spanish King Philip II, a devout Catholic, was obsessed with the idea of establishing Catholicism throughout the world, so he constantly quarreled with countries where the Reformation had won.
The king's special hatred was caused by England.
However, it should be noted that religious motives played the last role here — they were only a pretext and a consolation of the heart for the hypocritical, self deceptive Philip.
The reasons for the hatred of the "vile island" were hidden in another sphere.
The Spaniards exported untold wealth from their colonies in South America and Africa.
Dozens of ships were sent to the shores of Spain every month, loaded with gold, silver, live goods (slaves).
But not all the ships arrived at their destination: on the way they were attacked by English pirates and robbed everything clean.
Piracy in England had almost a state status — the lion's share of the loot fell into the royal treasury, those who distinguished themselves were awarded noble titles (suffice it to recall Sir Francis Drake) and high military ranks.
There was no limit to Philip's rage.
However, he was afraid to fight Elizabeth with military methods for a long time — there was also a strong fleet and experienced commanders in England.
Any attempts to resolve the conflict with the help of international law did not lead to anything.
For many years, there was a so called "war under the carpet"between Spain and England.
Philip did not disdain any means, weaving intrigues against the English queen: it is known that the threads of almost all plots aimed at the "physical elimination" of Elizabeth led to Madrid.
In 1584, the Privy Council in London organized the vigilance group "Indissoluble Association", whose task was to protect Elizabeth personally.
And the group worked conscientiously!
Conspiracies were revealed by dozens, the perpetrators ended their lives on the block.
However, Elizabeth could not always tempt fate.
Realizing that war with Spain is inevitable, and having publicly announced its beginning three times, the queen, nevertheless, changed her mind three times and, finally, forbade discussing this issue at all in the Council.
As usual, Elizabeth hoped that the problem would somehow"resolve itself".
However, the problem did not resolve.
The tension in the relations between the two countries reached its peak by the 1580s.
To the damage caused by pirate raids on Spanish merchant ships, Philip was forced to add the intervention of England in the war between Spain and the Netherlands.
The Netherlands fought for national independence, the situation was aggravated by the irreconcilable hostility between the Spanish Catholics and the Dutch Protestants.
For many years, Protestant England financially helped the Netherlands; in 1585, 50 English ships entered the Bay of Flushing, which meant direct military intervention by England in this bilateral conflict.
The English commander in chief, Count Robert Leicester, accepted from the Dutch the title of Supreme Governor of the United Provinces of the Netherlands.
This made Philip of Spain indescribably furious.
It became obvious that a direct military clash between the "superpowers" could not be avoided.
In Spain, the hasty construction of new warships began.
By 1588, all the preparations were completed.
130 Spanish ships, the Invincible Armada, were ready to launch a victorious campaign against the British (and no one doubted that the campaign would be "victorious").
It should be noted that, contrary to popular opinion, Philip did not intend to "conquer" the English: his ultimate goal was to get Elizabeth to accept acts of tolerance for English Catholics and the final withdrawal of England from the Netherlands.
Everyone knows how the military escapade of Philip of Spain ended in England.
The brave little England (despite the complete military superiority of the Spaniards — 35 ships against 130!) crushed the Armada — a fact known to everyone from the school history course.
But is everything so unambiguous in this victory?
Here's how events unfolded.
Francis Drake
Setbacks have plagued the Spanish ships since they sailed from Lisbon.
At first, a strong headwind did not allow us to move away from the shore, then the ships, whose navigation system was too far from perfect by today's standards, began to drift to the south.
Due to bad weather conditions, the Armada moved barely to the shores of England, in addition, food and water began to rot in raw barrels (dry, prepared in advance for the campaign, burned by the frenzied pirate Sir Francis Drake when he was fishing a year earlier off the coast of Cadiz).
To make matters worse, before reaching the coast of England, the Armada was caught in a terrible storm, and many ships were damaged.
But in England, this was not yet known.
There was, if not panic, then a mood very close to it.
It was clear that if the Spaniards landed, the English army would not last long; even London could not be defended, because the forces were too unequal.2
Finally, the Armada, which was pretty battered by the elements, appeared in the English Channel.
Several inconclusive battles took place; the Spaniards did not land on the shore, as they were waiting for reinforcements from the Netherlands.
However, the reinforcements were late, and this played a fatal role for the Spaniards.
Suddenly an unprecedented hurricane rose, the sea raged in August as it happens only in winter.
The heavy, unwieldy Spanish ships sank one after another.
The British artillery was finishing off the remnants of the enemy fleet from the shore.
The armada began to slowly retreat to lick its wounds, and then return and strike again.
But truly, an inescapable fate!
- while retreating, the Armada again gets caught in a storm near the Orkney Islands.
The possibility of further continuation of military operations becomes doubtful.
On top of everything, there is a panic among the sailors.
Superstitious Catholics, Spaniards attributed the series of failures that fell on them to the machinations of Satan.
Sir Francis Drake, the famous English pirate and later admiral of the fleet, inspired the enemies with the most real horror; he was called "El Draque", the Dragon.
There were legends about him, one darker than the other; no one doubted that this man had sold his soul to the devil in exchange for victories in naval battles; indeed, luck in military affairs never turned away from him.
It was also said that evil forces endowed Francis Drake with the ability to summon storms: at that time it was considered a special witchcraft science that could be mastered perfectly - there would be desire and courage.
So after the repeated bad weather three times, the Spaniards had no doubt who exactly was to blame for what happened.
The Spaniards were paralyzed with real terror when they were overtaken by the third storm.
No orders could force ordinary sailors to continue the military campaign.
The remnants of the Armada stretched back to the shores of Spain.
The crusade against heretics failed thanks to the "machinations of the devil".
And in England, for a long time, almost two months, they did not know about the "victory won".
There was still confusion here, until finally it became clear that Philip considered it wise not to resume hostilities at a more appropriate time, when the devil would be distracted by some other business and let the vile island out of sight.
Such was the true story of the death of the Spanish Armada.
The English owed their victory to the island position, three storms and the dark reputation of Francis Drake.
The crown spent 161,000 pounds on the fight against the Armada — a colossal amount of money at that time.
And the victory turned out to be Pyrrhic, because it solved absolutely nothing.
The war with Spain was by no means over (in 1596 and in 1599, Philip equipped new Armadas against England).
The war between Spain and England was slowly but surely exhausting both states.
The insular position of England and extremely inconvenient bays made it virtually inaccessible for conquest.
Endless military skirmishes, which did not bring victory to anyone, gradually turned into a "behind the scenes war" again.
No longer hoping for direct intervention in England, Philip, nevertheless, exerted influence on literally all English internal affairs, attacking on all fronts.
When the liberation uprising against English rule rose in Ireland, it was Spain that supplied the head of the Tyrone rebels with money and military force.
It is not known what this exhausting confrontation would have turned out for England if in 1598 the violent Catholic Philip II had not calmed down forever.
His successor, Philip III, a weak willed and sentimental man, bore little resemblance to the former king.
The reins of power were concentrated in the greedy hands of Lerma, 3 who was not at all concerned with state affairs, but exclusively with personal enrichment.
5. "A WOMAN WHO WAS SURPRISED BY TIME"4
Perhaps, the state of affairs at the time of the completion of his activity best testifies to the effectiveness of the works of a statesman.
Alas, by the end of Elizabeth's reign, England was by no means prosperous.
Tyrone was rampaging in Ireland, and the response of the British army did not bring any results.
Military operations in France were also extremely unsuccessful.
The war with Spain was emptying the treasury.
The military tax has increased several times in recent years (late 1590s early 1600s), but this did not save the situation.
The queen had to pawn the family jewels from the royal treasury, but, taken as a pawn by merchants, they brought only about 10,000 pounds and could not save the country from bankruptcy.
There was a monstrous inflation in the kingdom: money was almost worthless.
The number of poor people dying right on the street grew rapidly, bread riots and outbreaks of violence against royal officials multiplied throughout the country.
In the villages, they fed on dead dogs and cats and cursed the queen.
Robert Essex
The last straw of the disasters was the rebellion of the Earl of Essex (1601).
He was the royal favorite, her sunset and the bitterest passion.
This strange connection is the quintessence of Elizabeth's relationship to her male favorites in general; all the unsightly sides of her character are visible in this story, as if at a glance.
It would seem that none of Elizabeth's former favorites received so many signs of attention: it was the Earl of Essex who was granted a royal glove for a hat, only he allowed himself to enter the royal chambers without being informed, only with him the queen locked herself in the rooms for long hours for playing lurch and fitting.5 However, the special position that Robert Essex occupied in the queen's heart did not turn him into either a rich or a powerful man: he had huge debts, his patronage of individuals did not bring them any dividends (rather, problems), his attempts to interfere in state affairs, as usual, were ignored by Elizabeth.
However, the queen had every reason to doubt his talents: all the military operations in which Essex participated as commander in chief were extremely unsuccessful for England, which, however, did not detract from his excessive self conceit and pride.
Elizabeth played with fire, for many years behaving with a young, vain, strong man as with an annoying beloved child, who is allowed to play pranks, but always points to the place and is not taken seriously.
This prolonged game, started by the queen, could not last forever.
Too much (and nothing!) it was allowed to Essex: he dragged himself after the ladies of the court, fathered illegitimate children, constantly cursed and put up with Elizabeth, not hesitating to turn his back on her in front of everyone and even grab his sword in response to her public slaps and sending to hell.
Essex's attempts to use his special position for the benefit of his friends ended in nothing: he was busy for the appointment of his closest friend Francis Bacon to a lucrative public position — Elizabeth, as always, ignored his opinion.
The hapless earl was mocked ("all London is laughing at her buffoon!")
Yielding to numerous requests, Elizabeth agreed to send Essex to pacify the rebellion in Ireland, but it ended in failure.
Essex suffered a complete military defeat.
Unable to restrain Tyrone, he returned to London without permission, leaving the entire north of the island as far as Dublin completely exposed to the rebels.
Elizabeth realized that her game with the" youngster " (Essex was 33 years younger, and the queen never learned to see him as a man, not a child) had gone too far.
Such a misdemeanor (in fact, a war crime) could not be left unpunished.
Essex was threatened with the trial of the Star Chamber; however, he did not wait for justice, but, possessed by excessive pride, joined the conspiracy against Elizabeth, moreover, he was in the first ranks of the rebels who intended to force the abdication of the queen and the accession of James of Scotland.
The plot was doomed, like all the other Essex initiatives: he was neither a diplomat, nor a politician, nor a courtier, nor a conspirator.
The result is known: on February 25, 1601, a young man laid down his head on the scaffold.
Robert Cecil
After his death, Elizabeth never recovered from the greatest shock: a man whom she loved (as much as she could), and who owed her absolutely everything, dared to raise his hand against her.
However, we will say, did not "dear Robert" — the Earl of Leicester betray her?
However, at the very last moment he retreated — still realizing how dangerous it was to play with the queen.
Essex did not feel this danger.
It was the understanding that her power, in fact, ended, and killed Elizabeth.
As well as the fact that she is not loved by anyone, and her subjects are waiting for her death with impatience, which they do not even consider it necessary to hide.
One by one, with letters, rich gifts from London, Elizabethan courtiers went to James of Scotland (the closest royal blood relative), hoping in advance to win the favor of the future king.
Watching this fuss, Elizabeth could only repeat: "Mortua sed non sepulta... ""
Dead, but not buried."
Truly, it was a miserable end and a miserable end to a 45 year reign.
State affairs were already being decided without her participation.
In the same Ireland, a deal was made with the head of the rebels, Tyrone, about which Elizabeth never found out, believing to the end of her days that there was a war with Dublin; behind her back, Secretary of State Robert Cecil (the son of the late William) was preparing the accession to the throne of James Stuart.
Cecil managed not only politics and palace entertainment, but even tried to tell Elizabeth when to go to bed.
More and more often she was found crying.
However, this hardly surprised anyone: there was something to cry about.
Wars were waged in the Netherlands, France, Ireland, on the coast of Spain and at sea and without any hope of a close and successful conclusion; taxes increased enormously, and economic stability as it happened food prices rose, mortality increased sharply, there was a stagnation in trade, the state had a huge external debt.
Factional clashes had descended to open armed riots; religious strife was getting worse.
The successor — whoever he was was waiting for a difficult inheritance…
6. CONCLUSION
Contrary to the established opinions, Elizabeth was not a wise and strong statesman who pursued a reasonable political line according to the interests of her country.
Rather, she was an extremely inconsistent and indecisive monarch, striving to survive.
She did not have at least some coherent concept of state power, according to which she could rebuild her rule.
When making this or that decision, she refused to be guided not only by national interests, but sometimes by common sense, because, as a queen, she always remained an extremely unbalanced, hysterical woman with numerous personal quirks.
Her long reign lasted largely thanks to the courage, perseverance and talents of Secretary of State William Cecil; we would not be wrong if we say that the Queen, using the right of "ultimo ratio Regis", rather hindered than helped Cecil to pursue a clear, meaningful policy arising from the national interests of England.
As soon as Cecil was gone, instantly all the visible power of the Elizabethan power crumbled like a house of cards: it turned out that not a single problem in the state was finally solved.
James I had to lead the country out of a severe economic crisis and deal with numerous unfinished wars.
And that wasnot all.
Elizabeth never solved one of the most important ethical and political issues of her reign: the religious question.
Because of her more than loyal attitude to Catholics (Conservatives), Elizabeth created a huge problem of radicals.
The Protestants longed for real religious reforms: they later received them, but for this it took a bloody English revolution, which was carried out under the banner of Protestant Puritanism.
All her reign, Elizabeth, in general, did not try to solve any problems: she preferred to wait them out, because she never cared about what would actually happen to England after her death.
She was much less interested in England than in her own well being: Elizabeth was an ordinary egoist, even if she was clothed with power.
In general, the example of an egoist monarch is rather typical for world and, in particular, Russian history.
Many historians have noticed an obvious, though not unambiguous parallel between the reigns of Elizabeth Tudor and the Russian empress Elizabeth Petrovna.
In fact, there is a lot in common in their fate.
Both grew up in the shadow of their fathers — great statesmen.
Both Henry VIII and Peter I were distinguished by a cool temper and a warm hearted inconstancy.
Both Elizavets were deprived of the right to inherit the throne, since their origin was considered doubtful (Elizabeth Petrovna was born before Peter's marriage with Catherine I).
Both of them spent their childhood in an atmosphere of constant palace intrigues, which hardened their character and taught them cunning and resourcefulness of mind.
Just like Elizabeth Tudor during the reign of Mary the Bloody, Elizabeth Petrovna was subjected to all kinds of persecution under Anna Ioannovna.
Both princesses were forced to seek protection in a close circle of personally loyal persons, which even before their accession to the throne gave rise to their well known dependence on certain men (for Elizabeth Petrovna, Alexey Razumovsky came first, for Elizabeth Tudor — Robert Lester and William Cecil).
You can also find a lot of similarities in their characters.
Both adored dresses and secular entertainment and often left state affairs to their closest advisers to solve.
Both inherited a cool temper from their fathers — Elizabeth Tudor could easily break a court lady's finger or slash her hand with a knife in the heat of anger; Elizabeth Petrovna swore at"conferences at the highest court" with 6 words that would suit uncouth peasants, but certainly not an educated secular woman.
Both women were childless, although Elizabeth Petrovna did not wear the title of "virgin"with pride and vanity.
On the contrary, everyone at the court was aware of her morganatic marriage with Alexey Razumovsky.
The problem of the heir was particularly acute both in Russia and in England; Elizabeth Petrovna tried to solve it by writing out her nephew Karl Peter Ulrich from Holstein, whom she declared her successor.
As you know, her choice was not very successful — the young man turned out to be incompetent and unsuited to state affairs.
However, by marrying him to Sophia Augusta Friederike of Anhalt Zerbst, Elizabeth, without knowing it, did a very useful thing for the history of Russia.
For all their similarities, both Elizabeths went down in history as completely unequal figures.
The 20 year reign of Elizabeth Petrovna, in which, in addition to Razumovsky, P. I. Shuvalov, M. I. Vorontsov, A. P. Bestuzhev played important roles, was a fairly calm and fruitful period in the history of Russia.
Positive administrative and financial reforms were carried out, the national question in Ukraine was solved, a reasonable foreign policy was carried out, Moscow University was opened, the death penalty was unofficially abolished.
However, the brilliant reign of Catherine II overshadowed the modest reign of Elizabeth Petrovna, and there were no prerequisites for her later exaltation (although during her lifetime she enjoyed constant respect; she was called "the daughter of Peter the Great" not only by right of birth, but also for personal merits).
The posthumous fate of Elizabeth Tudor, as we have already said, was completely different.
By the will of the court historiographers, her reign was turned into a fragrant legend.
Clio, the muse of history, sometimes does her own things very bizarrely, but time passes and everything returns to normal.
I would like to hope that this narrative will also contribute to the assertion of historical truth.
* End.
For the beginning, see "Vestnik" #9 (320), 2003
1 The Virgin Queen (eng.).
2 In England there was no standing Army, during the wars the militia was gathered; its number, weapons and combat capability were significantly inferior to the regular army of the Spaniards.
3 Lerma, Gomez de Sandoval y Rojas (1552-1623) - first minister and favorite of Philip III, Cardinal (1618).
4 These words about Queen Elizabeth belong to Sir Walter Raleigh (1552-1618), an English politician, poet, and historian.
5 Card games.
6 This was the name of the unofficial state Council at the court of Elizabeth Petrovna.
Home page | Archive | The content of the issue
Number 10(321) May 14, 2003
