- Analyze the concept of Enlightened Despotism. Assess the impact of the ideas of the Enlightenment with respect to the policies of Catherine II of Russia.
The term ‘Enlightened Despotism’ is used to describe the governments of those eighteenth century monarchs who were familiar with the ideas of the Enlightenment and carried out a programme advocated by the philosophers of the age. Policies such as the elimination of irrationalities in the administration and judiciary through rigorous centralization and codification, the introduction of more humane punishments, religious tolerance, alleviation of the lot of the peasantry, etc. are typically associated with the governments of Prussia, Austria and Russia in the eighteenth century.
In a sense, the very term Enlightened Despotism seems to be a contradiction of sorts for ‘despotism’ seems to be the very antithesis of the ideas associated with the Enlightenment—rationalism, the liberty of the individual, the natural development of the economy, minimal state interference, etc.
Fritz Hartung in his book ‘Enlightened Despotism’ argues that perhaps a more appropriate expression would be “Enlightened Absolutism” for while the former is equivalent to unchecked tyranny the latter term denotes a monarchical form of government not hampered by parliamentary checks but which voluntarily submits to laws and acknowledges the rights of subjects. The contradiction in the ideas of the Enlightenment which supposedly motivated the policies of these monarchs and the ideal of centralization implicit in the very concept of absolutism is resolved through the doctrines of ‘eclaire despotisme’ developed in the 1760s by the French Physiocrats as an offshoot of their economic philosophy. The role of the state according to these doctrines is to intervene in public life to restore the individual’s natural right to freedom, the rule of reason and the natural order of things by removing all obstacles to the free development of productive forces. Trusting in the ultimately victorious power of enlightenment, the executive power of the State was vested entirely in the hands of the monarch.
The theory of Enlightened Despotism also implied the subordination of the monarch to a higher entity, the State. In the opinion of Frederick the Great, for instance, the king was not the owner but only the administrator of the wealth of the country. He saw the monarch as the “first servant of the state.” At the same time, for all practical purposes the will of the monarch was seen as equivalent to that of the State. The power of the monarch was unrestrained by either a constitution or by representative parliamentary institutions. The legitimacy for absolutism was now derived from the values of the Enlightenment. According to W.H. Bruford, the spirit of Enlightened Despotism was founded in the conviction that it was the duty of the State to compel its immature subjects to lead a life governed by reason for their own and the common good. In this way the natural conflict between a centralizing absolutist state and the principle of individual liberty was negated by asserting that the former was necessary for the latter. The state was seen as a voluntary contract between individuals entrusted with supreme power in order to maintain common welfare and security.
It is important to note that most of the sovereigns associated with Enlightened Despotism could not have been influenced by the doctrines of ‘eclaire despotisme’ simply because their activities preceded the enunciation of the doctrine. Nonetheless these monarchs have in common certain traits: a tendency towards the reform of administration, a drive towards greater centralization, the extension of the educational system, religious tolerance, etc. It is also a fact that these rulers were in their personal lives deeply influenced by the ideas of the Enlightenment. Joseph II, Frederick the Great and Catherine II were all correspondents of Voltaire. Whether these personal preferences and inclinations motivated the reforms of these rulers and indeed to what extent they manifested themselves in their policies, is of course a matter of debate.
In 1763, Catherine had seized power in the traditional Russian manner of a palace revolution: she rode into St. Petersburg and was proclaimed Empress by the Archbishop. Peter III signed his abdication and duly died a few days later, apparently poisoned by the brother of Catherine’s lover. Catherine was a keen patron of the arts. She greatly embellished St. Petersburg, notably by her extensions to the Winter Palace.
Catherine the Great of Russia was undoubtedly amongst the most ardent students of the Enlightenment. She was well-versed in the writings of Voltaire and Montesquieu. She bought Diderot’s library and upon the death of Voltaire, distributed a hundred copies of his complete works amongst the citizens of Russia. While she was inspired by the ideals of the Enlightenment, she openly confessed the limitations of her ‘enlightened absolutism’.
Upon her accession to the throne, Catherine found herself in possession of an administrative machine that did not work, an army whose payments were in arrears and a revenue system incapable of meeting the state’s expenses. In the initial years of her rule, she set about restoring the direct control of the monarch over the administration, attending debates in the Senate, interrogating officials and undertaking tours of inspection.
Under Catherine, steps were taken to create a permanent Council of State (although she eventually had to make do with occasional councils of varying composition) and limit the powers of the Senate instituted by Peter I. Its members were once again subjected to the direct control of the monarch. The ‘colleges’ of Peter I were reduced in number and their departments dealing with military naval and foreign affairs soon became independent ministries.
Her chief reforms were in local government. Convinced of the need for decentralization by the Pugachev rebellion, she reduced the size of the provincial Gubernia (an administrative provincial unit inttituted by Peter I). Each gubernium was subdivided into districts and presided over by a governor assisted by boards of officials nominated by the central government as well as an Office of Public Welfare to supervise health, education and poor relief. Each district was administered by a court and an official called an ispravnik (corrector) elected by the nobles, responsible for police and poor relief. Each district had an Assembly of Deputies which met every three years.
Contrary to patterns of development in other absolutist states, the reign of Catherine was marked by gradual decentralization as it became increasingly apparent that Russia was too large for centralized rule. The monarch thus grew increasingly dependent on the provincial nobility.
Catherine devoted her time to the formulation of a set of instructions for the codification of Russian law. These instructions, which were based on principles such as the equality of all men, the relaxation of harsh punishments, the gradual abolition of serfdom, etc., were greeted with much praise in Europe. However the Legislative Commission convened to draft the new the new legal code failed to do so. The Commission, consisting of representatives of the different estates saw much disagreement over the reform of existing laws as each sought to protect the interests of his class. The whole episode was a failure and the Commission was soon suspended. While some historians see it as nothing more than an elaborate propaganda stunt, Andrews argues that Catherine genuinely wanted reforms, but the Legislative Commission convinced her of their impracticability.
However some reforms were introduced; civil cases were separated from criminal and the nobility, the townsmen and the peasants each came under the jurisdiction of their own court systems.
Under Catherine, there were no attempts to abolish serfdom. Landowners were granted permission to arbitrarily send their serfs to Siberia on their own initiative. Serfdom was actually extended by Catherine; she introduced it in the new lands of White Russia and the Ukraine.
Being dependent on their support, she sought to strengthen the position of the nobility. The Charter of the Nobility granted in 1785 recognized the nobles as a separate estate, confirmed their traditional privileges as well as exempted them from state service and personal taxation and ensured it total jurisdictional control of the rural labour forces. In return they were expected to ensure that the serfs paid their poll tax and discharged their compulsory military service.
In response to the widespread social and economic discontent best exemplified perhaps by the revolt led by Pugachev in 1773, Catherine embarked upon a policy of economic liberalism. State monopolies were ended and steps were taken to establish internal free trade. Protective tariff policies were jettisoned as more liberal tariffs were put in place. The export of corn was permitted and other export duties were abolished. Commercial treaties were concluded with Poland, Turkey, Austria, etc. Improvements were made in road and canal building. However by 1793, Catherine had changed her liberal views and there was a return to mercantilist policies. Measures were taken to stabilize the currency and stimulate trade. However most of Russia’s trade was in the hands of foreigners and few of Russia’s exports were manufactures.
Catherine continued Peter’s policy of subordinating the Church to the State. Church lands were appropriated by the state and secularized. This deprived the Orthodox clergy of political independence; they were now financially reliant on the state. The partitions of Poland led to an influx of Catholic subjects who were however allowed religious freedom. When the Society of Jesus was dissolved she did not expel the Jesuits. She even extended toleration to the Jews and admitted them to municipal office.
Catherine took several concrete steps to improve public instruction in Russia. She gave the Academy of Fine Arts a new foundation and it soon came to supervise all branches of art throughout Russia. She founded the Smolny Institute for the daughters of noblemen and established the College of Medicine, also taking the decision to be inoculated against smallpox. By the end of her reign there were 300 free public schools in Russia but these were all in the towns and in general elementary education was left to village schools run by the clergy and private schools run by landlords.
Unlike Frederick II, Catherine seems to have been fully convinced of the ideals of the Enlightenment and their propagation. However the vast size of Russia rendered the implementation of some of her ideas impracticable. The resistance from the nobility upon whom she was dependent to a great extent also limited the scope of her reforms. Nonetheless, the extension of the system of serfdom was hardly necessary, although it was justified by the disorder in public finances. Her programme of conquest imposed severe constraints on her policies as well.
Bibliography
- Hartung, Fritz: Enlightened Despotism
- Andrews, Stuart: Enlightened Despotism at Home