home · Measurements · States whose rulers entered into a sacred alliance. Napoleonic Wars and the Holy Alliance as a system of pan-European order

States whose rulers entered into a sacred alliance. Napoleonic Wars and the Holy Alliance as a system of pan-European order

Not being, in the exact sense of the word, a formalized agreement between the powers that would impose certain obligations on them, the Holy Alliance, nevertheless, went down in the history of European diplomacy as “a cohesive organization with a sharply defined clerical-monarchist ideology, created on the basis of the suppression of revolutionary sentiments, wherever they never showed up."

Encyclopedic YouTube

  • 1 / 5

    Castlereagh explained England's non-participation in the treaty by the fact that, according to the English constitution, the king does not have the right to sign treaties with other powers.

    Signifying the character of the era, the Holy Alliance was the main organ of the pan-European reaction against liberal aspirations. Its practical significance was expressed in the resolutions of a number of congresses (Aachen, Troppaus, Laibach and Verona), at which the principle of intervention in the internal affairs of other states was fully developed with the aim of forcibly suppressing all national and revolutionary movements and maintaining the existing system with its absolutist and clerical-aristocratic trends.

    Congresses of the Holy Alliance

    Aachen Congress

    Congresses in Troppau and Laibach

    Typically considered together as a single congress.

    Congress in Verona

    Collapse of the Holy Alliance

    The post-war system of Europe created by the Congress of Vienna was contrary to the interests of the new emerging class - the bourgeoisie. Bourgeois movements against feudal-absolutist forces became the main driving force of historical processes in continental Europe. The Holy Alliance prevented the establishment of bourgeois orders and increased the isolation of monarchical regimes. With the growth of contradictions between the members of the Union, there was a decline in the influence of the Russian court and Russian diplomacy on European politics.

    By the end of the 1820s, the Holy Alliance began to disintegrate, which was facilitated, on the one hand, by a retreat from the principles of this Union on the part of England, whose interests at that time were very much in conflict with the policy of the Holy Alliance both in the conflict between the Spanish colonies in Latin America and metropolis, and in relation to the still ongoing Greek uprising, and on the other hand, the liberation of Alexander I’s successor from the influence of Metternich and the divergence of interests of Russia and Austria in relation to Turkey.

    “As for Austria, I am confident in it, since our treaties determine our relations.”

    But Russian-Austrian cooperation could not eliminate Russian-Austrian contradictions. Austria, as before, was frightened by the prospect of the emergence of independent states in the Balkans, probably friendly to Russia, the very existence of which would cause the growth of national liberation movements in the multinational Austrian Empire. As a result, in the Crimean War, Austria, without directly participating in it, took an anti-Russian position.

    Bibliography

    • For the text of the Holy Alliance, see Complete Collection of Laws, No. 25943.
    • For the French original, see Part 1 of Vol. IV “Collections of treatises and conventions concluded by Russia with foreign powers” ​​by Professor Martens.
    • "Mémoires, documents et écrits divers laissés par le prince de Metternich", vol. I, pp. 210-212.
    • V. Danevsky, “Systems of political balance and legitimism” 1882.
    • Ghervas, Stella [Gervas, Stella Petrovna], Réinventer la tradition. Alexandre Stourdza et l’Europe de la Sainte-Alliance, Paris, Honoré Champion, 2008. ISBN 978-2-7453-1669-1
    • Nadler V. K. Emperor Alexander I and the idea of ​​the Holy Alliance. vol. 1-5. Kharkov, 1886-1892.
    • Lyapin V. A., Sitnikov I. V. // The Holy union in the plans of Alexander I. Ekaterinburg: Ural Publishing House. University, 2003. - P. 151-154.

    A few days before Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo, on June 9, 1815, Austria, England, Prussia, Russia, Switzerland and France signed the "Final Act" - the final document of the Congress of Vienna. This document consisted of 121 articles. It provided for the restoration of the French Bourbon dynasty in the person of Louis XVIII and the deprivation of France of all its conquests. Other European states significantly strengthened their positions: Switzerland received strategically important Alpine passes; in Italy the Sardinian kingdom was restored, to which Savoy, Nice and Genoa were annexed; Austria established its power over Northern Italy and Eastern Galicia, also gaining predominant influence in the German Confederation; the lands of the Duchy of Warsaw went to Russia, with the exception of Krakow, which was given the status of a “free city”; Prussia received North Saxony, the left bank of the Rhine, most of Westphalia, Swedish Pomerania and the island of Rügen; Holland and Belgium formed the Kingdom of the Netherlands; Sweden received the territory of Norway; England secured part of the former colonies of Holland and France.

    After the signing of the Vienna agreements, the Austrian Foreign Minister Metternich said: “In Europe there is only one problem - revolution.” It is also noteworthy that Napoleon himself, a week after the defeat at Waterloo, said: “The powers are not at war with me, but with the revolution. They always saw me as its representative, a man of the revolution.”

    Indeed, after the final overthrow of Napoleon, the desire to preserve the established international order arose and strengthened in Europe, and the means for this were the permanent union of European sovereigns and the periodic convening of international congresses. Russian Emperor Alexander I was an ardent supporter of this idea. On September 26, 1815, on his initiative, the formation of the Holy Alliance was announced, and the document was also signed by Emperor Francis I of Austria and King Frederick William III of Prussia. This treaty was subsequently gradually joined by almost all the monarchs of Europe with the exception of Great Britain and the Ottoman Empire. This union was intended to preserve the inviolability of the decisions of the Congress of Vienna of 1814-1815. and the system of international relations established by him. Based on the principle of supporting the ruling monarchical dynasties, the participants in this union fought against any manifestation of the revolutionary and national liberation movement in Europe.

    In 1818-1822. A number of congresses of the Holy Alliance took place - in Aachen, Troppau, Laibach (modern Ljubljana), Verona, the participants of which expressed their readiness to fight any manifestation of revolutionary sentiments on the continent. Thus, Alexander I, contrary to public opinion in Russia, refused to support the uprising that began in 1821 in Greece against Ottoman rule.

    Thus, at this time there was a regrouping of forces in Europe, as French hegemony was replaced by the political dominance of Russia, England and Austria. To a large extent, this balance of power contributed to the stabilization of international relations. The Vienna system lasted for more than forty years, and during this time Europe did not know significant bloody wars. Nevertheless, it, like most political associations, was characterized by the aggravation of contradictions between the great European powers and the desire of these states to expand the spheres of their political and economic influence.

    JULIANA KRUDENER

    Alexander left Vienna in 1815, without waiting for the completion of all the work of the Congress. By this time, by the way, he met an elderly lady imbued with mystical ideas, Baroness Juliana Krudener. Many historians and biographers of Alexander attached great importance to this meeting in relation to the strengthening of the religious-mystical mood that began to manifest itself noticeably in him at that time. And Alexander himself attached great importance to this acquaintance. But it must be said that a penchant for mysticism developed in him even before meeting Baroness Krudener, and one can think that it was thanks to this circumstance that Mme Krudener gained access to it. Apparently, the terrible events of 1812 gave a decisive impetus to the development of Alexander’s mysticism, but even before 1812 Alexander willingly talked with various monks and “holy people.” From Shishkov's notes we learn that in 1813, between reports on important state affairs, Shishkov, the Secretary of State, read to Alexander a selection of extracts from the ancient prophets, the text of which, as it seemed to them both, was very suitable for modern events - while both of them poured themselves tears from tenderness and excess of feelings. Since 1812, the Gospel was constantly with Alexander, and he often seemed to guess from it, opening pages at random and dwelling on the coincidence of individual texts of the Gospel with the external facts of the surrounding life. However, many people in Europe then indulged in such a mystical mood. It was especially popular to apply some expressions of the Apocalypse to Napoleon. The enormous spread of Freemasonry and Masonic lodges also marked a strong development of mysticism. The colossal world upheavals of that era obviously influenced the alarmed minds of contemporaries in this regard. Be that as it may, this mystical mood of Alexander in 1815 was not yet noticeably reflected in his socio-political views and did not entail any steps in the field of domestic policy. Only the insightful La Harpe, even then, was extremely upset by this new inclination of Alexander.

    In the field of foreign policy, this inclination of Alexander - not without the participation of Baroness Krudener - found for the first time a rather innocent expression in his proposal to his then allies to form the Holy Alliance of the Princes of Europe, which would introduce ideas of peace and brotherhood into international relations. According to the idea of ​​this union, the sovereigns of Europe should treat each other as brothers, and their subjects as fathers; all quarrels and international misunderstandings must be settled peacefully. The Prussian king Frederick William reacted with some sympathy to this idea; the Austrian Emperor Franz, a pietist, who was constantly in the hands of the Jesuits, signed this treaty only after consulting with Metternich, who said that although this was an empty chimera, it was completely harmless. The English Prince Regent could not sign this act without the consent of Parliament, but he politely expressed his sympathy for Alexander’s idea in a special letter. Then, little by little, all the sovereigns of Europe, except the Turkish Sultan and the Pope, entered into this union. Subsequently, in the hands of Metternich, this institution degenerated into an alliance of sovereigns against the restless peoples, but in 1815 the alliance did not yet have such significance, and Alexander was and showed himself then to be an obvious supporter of liberal institutions.

    THE FATHERLAND IS IN DANGER!

    As always happens when dividing the spoils, Napoleon's victors began to quarrel: Austria with Prussia - because of hegemony in Germany, Prussia with England - because of Saxony, and all of them with Russia - because of Poland, since tsarism wanted to annex the Duchy of Warsaw entirely to himself (“I conquered the duchy,” said Alexander I, “and I have 480 thousand soldiers to defend it”), and other powers were against the excessive strengthening of Russia. Disagreements escalated. On January 3, 1815, England, Austria and France entered into a secret agreement and outlined a plan for a military campaign against Russia and Prussia, which it was decided to open by the end of March. The commander-in-chief of the troops of the three powers, Prince K.F., was also appointed. Schwarzenberg. In such a situation, on March 6, the “brothers” of the monarchs learned amazing news: Napoleon left Elba and landed in France. Yes, having analytically compared the rejection of the Bourbons in France and the strife within the 6th coalition, Napoleon saw in this a chance for himself to return to the French throne. On March 1, with a detachment of 1,100 people, he landed in the south of France and in 19 days, without firing a single shot, he again subjugated the country. The Bourbons fled to Belgium. This is how Napoleon’s enchanting “Hundred Days” began.

    The news of Napoleon's return frightened, but also rallied the coalition. They instantly cast aside all their feuds and, in the words of V.O. Klyuchevsky, “convulsively grabbed hold of Russia, of Alexander, ready to again be at his disposal.” On March 13, eight powers declared Napoleon “the enemy of humanity” and pledged to fight him until victory, thereby legally formalizing the 7th and final anti-Napoleonic coalition.

    Napoleon this time did not want to rouse France into a revolutionary war under the slogan “The Fatherland is in danger!” In a conventional war, he did not have enough strength to fight the 7th coalition. On June 18, at the Battle of Waterloo, the Allies defeated it. Napoleon was deposed for the second time and now exiled literally far away - to the distant and deserted, almost uninhabited island of St. Helena, where he spent the last 6 years of his life in strict isolation (he died there on May 5, 1821).

    In the 50s of this century, the Swedish toxicologist S. Forshuvud established by bombarding Napoleon's hair with nuclear particles that the emperor died not from stomach cancer, as was believed throughout the world, but from gradual arsenic poisoning. According to Forshuvud, the poisoner was Count S.T. Montolon is a Bourbon agent.

    The Congress of Vienna completed its work shortly before Waterloo. Its final act was signed on June 9, 1815. It satisfied the ambitions of all coalitionists. Russia received the lion's share of the Duchy of Warsaw under the name “Kingdom of Poland” (in the same 1815, Alexander I granted the Kingdom of Poland a constitution and autonomy within the Russian Empire). Austria and Prussia divided the remaining part of the Duchy of Warsaw among themselves and acquired rich lands: Austria in Italy, Prussia in Saxony. England secured Malta, the Ionian Islands and a number of French colonies. As for France, it was reduced to the borders of 1792 and occupied for 5 years. The monarchs overthrown by the French Revolution and Napoleon returned to its throne, as to other European thrones (in Spain, Piedmont, the Roman region, Naples, and the German principalities).

    Thus, the Congress of Vienna legitimized the restoration of feudal-absolutist orders in Europe. Since the people did not want to accept the old kings and opposed them, the organizers of the congress agreed to jointly suppress outbreaks of popular discontent anywhere. To this end, they decided to unite in the Holy Alliance.

    ACT OF THE HOLY ALLIANCE (1815)

    They solemnly declare that the subject of this act is to reveal to the face of the universe their unshakable determination, both in the government of the states entrusted to them, and in political relations with all other governments, to be guided by no other rules than the commandments, sowing the holy faith, the commandments of love , truth and peace...

    On this basis he led them. agreed on the following articles:

    Art. 1. According to the words of the sacred scriptures, which command all men to be brothers, there are three dogas. the monarch will remain united by the bonds of real and inextricable brotherhood and, considering themselves as if they were fellow citizens, they will, in any case and in every place, begin to give each other assistance, reinforcement and help; in relation to their subjects and troops, they, like fathers of families, will govern them in the same spirit of brotherhood with which they are animated to preserve faith, peace and truth.

    Art. 2. Therefore, let there be a single prevailing right both between the mentioned authorities and their subjects: to bring services to each other, to show mutual goodwill and love, to consider themselves as members of a single Christian people, since the three allied sovereigns consider themselves to have been appointed by providence for the management of three single family branches, namely Austria, Prussia and Russia, thus confessing that the autocrat of the Christian people, of which they and their subjects form a part, is truly no other than the one to whom the power actually belongs, since in him alone treasures of love, knowledge and endless wisdom are found, that is, God, our Divine Savior, Jesus Christ, the word of the Most High, the word of life. Accordingly, their Majesties, with the most tender care, urge their subjects to strengthen themselves from day to day in the rules and active performance of duties in which the divine Savior instructed people, as the only means of enjoying peace, which flows from a good conscience and which alone is durable.

    Art. 3. All powers who wish to solemnly recognize the sacred rules set forth in this act and who feel how necessary it is for the participation of kingdoms that have been shaken for a long time, so that these truths will henceforth contribute to the good of human destinies, can all be willingly and lovingly accepted into this sacred union.

    This year marks the 200th anniversary of one of the key events in the history of Europe, when, on the initiative of the Russian Emperor Alexander I, or, as he was called, Alexander the Blessed, steps were taken towards establishing a new world order. In order to avoid new wars similar to those waged by Napoleon, the idea was put forward of creating a collective security agreement, the guarantor of which was the Holy Alliance (la Sainte-Alliance) with the leading role of Russia.

    The personality of Alexander the Blessed remains one of the most complex and mysterious in Russian history. "Sphinx, unsolved to the grave", - Prince Vyazemsky will say about him. To this we can add that the fate of Alexander I beyond the grave is just as mysterious. We mean the life of the righteous elder Theodore Kuzmich the Blessed, canonized as a Saint of the Russian Orthodox Church.

    World history knows few figures comparable in scale to Emperor Alexander. This amazing personality remains misunderstood today. The Alexander era was perhaps the highest rise of Russia, its “golden age”, then St. Petersburg was the capital of Europe, and the fate of the world was decided in the Winter Palace.

    Contemporaries called Alexander I the “King of Kings”, the conqueror of the Antichrist, the liberator of Europe. European capitals greeted the Tsar-Liberator with delight: the population of Paris greeted him with flowers. The main square of Berlin is named after him - Alexander Platz. I want to dwell on the peacekeeping activities of Tsar Alexander. But first, let us briefly recall the historical context of the Alexander era.

    The global war, unleashed by revolutionary France in 1795, lasted almost 20 years (until 1815) and truly deserves the name “First World War,” both in its scope and duration. Then, for the first time, millions of armies clashed on the battlefields of Europe, Asia and America; for the first time, a war was waged on a planetary scale for the dominance of a total ideology.

    France was the breeding ground of this ideology, and Napoleon was the disseminator. For the first time, the war was preceded by the propaganda of secret sects and mass psychological indoctrination of the population. The Enlightenment Illuminati worked tirelessly, creating controlled chaos. The age of enlightenment, or rather darkness, ended with revolution, guillotine, terror and world war.

    The atheistic and anti-Christian basis of the new order was obvious to contemporaries.

    In 1806, the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church anathematized Napoleon for his persecution of the Western Church. In all churches of the Russian Empire (Orthodox and Catholic), Napoleon was declared the Antichrist and “the enemy of the human race.”

    But the European and Russian intelligentsia welcomed Napoleon as the new Messiah, who would make the revolution worldwide and unite all nations under his power. Thus, Fichte perceived the revolution led by Napoleon as preparation for the construction of an ideal world state.

    For Hegel in the French Revolution “the very content of the will of the human spirit appeared”. Hegel is undoubtedly right in his definition, but with the clarification that this European spirit was apostasy. Shortly before the French Revolution, the head of the Bavarian Illuminati, Weishaupt, sought to return man to his “natural state.” His credo: “We must destroy everything without regret, as much as possible and as quickly as possible. My human dignity does not allow me to obey anyone.". Napoleon became the executor of this will.

    After the defeat of the Austrian army in 1805, the thousand-year-old Holy Roman Empire was abolished, and Napoleon - officially "Emperor of the Republic" - became the de facto Emperor of the West. Pushkin will say about him:

    "Heir and murderer of rebellious liberty,

    This cold-blooded bloodsucker,

    This king, who disappeared like a dream, like the shadow of dawn.”

    After 1805, Alexander I, remaining the only Christian emperor in the world, confronted the spirits of evil and the forces of chaos. But the ideologists of the world revolution and globalists do not like to remember this. The Alexander era is unusually eventful: even the reigns of Peter the Great and Catherine pale in comparison.

    In less than a quarter of a century, Emperor Alexander won four military campaigns, repelling the aggression of Turkey, Sweden, Persia and, in 1812, the invasion of European armies. In 1813, Alexander liberated Europe and in the Battle of the Nations near Leipzig, where he personally led the allied armies, inflicted a mortal defeat on Napoleon. In March 1814, Alexander I, at the head of the Russian army, entered Paris in triumph.

    A subtle and far-sighted politician, a great strategist, diplomat and thinker - Alexander Pavlovich was unusually gifted by nature. Even his enemies recognized his deep and insightful mind: "He is as elusive as sea foam"- Napoleon said about him. After all this, how can one explain that Tsar Alexander I remains one of the most slandered figures in Russian history?

    He, the conqueror of Napoleon, is declared a mediocrity, and the Napoleon he defeated (by the way, who lost six military campaigns in his life) is declared a military genius.

    The cult of the cannibal Napoleon, who covered Africa, Asia and Europe with millions of corpses, this robber and murderer, has been supported and extolled for 200 years, including here in Moscow, which he burned.

    Globalists and slanderers of Russia cannot forgive Alexander the Blessed for his victory over the “global revolution” and the totalitarian world order.

    I needed this long introduction in order to outline the state of the world in 1814, when, after the end of the World War, all the heads of European states met at a congress in Vienna to determine the future order of the world.

    The main issue of the Vienna Congress was the issue of preventing wars on the continent, defining new borders, but, above all, suppressing the subversive activities of secret societies.

    Victory over Napoleon did not mean victory over the Illuminati ideology, which managed to permeate all the structures of society in Europe and Russia.

    Alexander’s logic was clear: whoever allows evil does the same.

    Evil knows no boundaries or measures, so the forces of evil must be resisted always and everywhere.

    Foreign policy is a continuation of domestic policy, and just as there is no double morality - for oneself and for others, there is no domestic and foreign policy.

    The Orthodox Tsar could not be guided by other moral principles in his foreign policy, in relations with non-Orthodox peoples.

    Alexander, in a Christian way, forgives the French all their guilt before Russia: the ashes of Moscow and Smolensk, robberies, the blown up Kremlin, the execution of Russian prisoners.

    The Russian Tsar did not allow his allies to plunder and divide defeated France into pieces. Alexander refuses reparations from a bloodless and hungry country. The Allies (Prussia, Austria and England) were forced to submit to the will of the Russian Tsar, and in turn refused reparations. Paris was neither robbed nor destroyed: the Louvre with its treasures and all the palaces remained intact.

    Europe was stunned by the king's generosity.

    In occupied Paris, crowded with Napoleonic soldiers, Alexander Pavlovich walked around the city without an escort, accompanied by one aide-de-camp. The Parisians, recognizing the king on the street, kissed his horse and boots. None of the Napoleonic veterans thought of raising a hand against the Russian Tsar: everyone understood that he was the only defender of defeated France.

    Alexander I granted amnesty to all Poles and Lithuanians who fought against Russia. He preached by personal example, firmly knowing that you can only change others with yourself. According to Saint Philaret of Moscow: "Alexander punished the French with mercy".

    The Russian intelligentsia - yesterday's Bonapartists and future Decembrists - condemned Alexander's generosity and at the same time prepared regicide.

    As the head of the Vienna Congress, Alexander Pavlovich invites defeated France to participate in the work on an equal basis and speaks in Congress with an incredible proposal to build a new Europe based on gospel principles. Never before in history has the Gospel been laid at the foundation of international relations.

    In Vienna, Emperor Alexander defines the rights of peoples: they must rest on the precepts of the Holy Scriptures.

    In Vienna, the Orthodox Tsar invites all monarchs and governments of Europe to abandon national egoism and Machiavellianism in foreign policy and sign the Charter of the Holy Alliance (la Sainte-Alliance). It is important to note that the term "Holy Alliance" itself in German and French sounds like "Holy Covenant", which strengthens its Biblical meaning.

    The Charter of the Holy Alliance will be finally signed by the participants of the Congress on September 26, 1815. The text was compiled personally by Emperor Alexander and only slightly corrected by the Emperor of Austria and the King of Prussia.

    Three monarchs, representing three Christian denominations: Orthodoxy, Catholicism and Protestantism, address the world in the preamble: “We solemnly declare that this act has no other purpose than the desire to demonstrate before the whole world our unshakable intention to make as a rule, both in the internal government of our states and in relations with other governments, the commandments of the Holy Religion, the commandments of justice, love, peace. , which are observed not only in private life, but should guide the policy of sovereigns, being the only means of strengthening human institutions and correcting their imperfections".

    From 1815 to 1818, fifty states signed the charter of the Holy Alliance. Not all signatures were signed sincerely; opportunism is characteristic of all eras. But then, in the face of Europe, the rulers of the West did not dare to openly refute the Gospel.

    From the very inception of the Holy Alliance, Alexander I was accused of idealism, mysticism and daydreaming. But Alexander was neither a dreamer nor a mystic; he was a man of deep faith and clear mind, and loved to repeat the words of King Solomon (Proverbs, ch. 8:13-16):

    “The fear of the Lord hates evil, I hate pride and arrogance, and I hate the evil way and deceitful lips. I have advice and truth, I am the mind, I have the strength. By me kings reign, and rulers legitimize truth. The rulers and the nobles and all the judges of the earth rule over me.”.

    For Alexander I history was a manifestation of God's Providence, the Manifestation of God in the world. On the medal, which was awarded to Russian victorious soldiers, were embossed the words of King David: “Not to us, Lord, not to us, but to Your Name give glory.”(Psalm 113.9).

    Plans for organizing European politics on evangelical principles were a continuation of the ideas of Paul I, the father of Alexander I, and were built on the patristic tradition.

    The great contemporary of Alexander I, Saint Philaret (Drozdov), proclaimed bibliocentrism as the basis of state policy. His words are comparable to the provisions of the Charter of the Holy Alliance.

    The enemies of the Holy Alliance understood perfectly well against whom the Alliance was directed. Liberal propaganda, both then and after, in every possible way denigrated the “reactionary” policies of the Russian tsars. According to F. Engels: “The world revolution will be impossible as long as Russia exists”.

    Until the death of Alexander I in 1825, the heads of European governments met in congresses to coordinate their policies.

    At the Congress in Verona, the king said to the French Foreign Minister and famous writer Chateaubriand:

    “Do you think that, as our enemies say, the Union is just a word covering up ambitions? […] There is no longer a policy of English, French, Russian, Prussian, Austrian, but there is only a general policy, and it is for the sake of the common good that peoples and kings must accept it. I should be the first to demonstrate firmness in the principles on which I founded the Union.".

    In his book “History of Russia,” the French poet and politician Alphonse de Lamartine writes: “Such was the idea of ​​the Holy Alliance, an idea that was slandered in its essence, representing it as base hypocrisy and a conspiracy of mutual support for the oppression of peoples. It is the duty of history to restore the Holy Alliance to its true meaning.".

    For forty years, from 1815 to 1855, Europe did not know war. At that time, Metropolitan Philaret of Moscow spoke about the role of Russia in the world: “The historical mission of Russia is the establishment of a moral order in Europe, based on the Gospel commandments”.

    The Napoleonic spirit will be resurrected with Napoleon I's nephew, Napoleon III, who, with the help of a revolution, will seize the throne. Under him, France, in alliance with England, Turkey, Piedmont, with the support of Austria, will start a war against Russia. The Europe of the Vienna Congress will end in Crimea, in Sevastopol. In 1855 the Holy Union will be buried.

    Many important truths can be learned by contradiction. Attempts at denial often lead to affirmation.

    The consequences of the disruption of the world order are well known: Prussia defeats Austria and, having united the German states, defeats France in 1870. The continuation of this war will be the war of 1914 - 1920, and the consequence of the First World War will be the Second World War.

    The Holy Alliance of Alexander I remains in history as a noble attempt to elevate humanity. This is the only example of unselfishness in the field of world politics in history when the Gospel became the Charter in international affairs.

    In conclusion, I would like to quote the words of Goethe, spoken in 1827 regarding the Holy Alliance, after the death of Alexander the Blessed:

    “The world needs to hate something great, which was confirmed by its judgments about the Holy Alliance, although nothing greater and more beneficial for humanity has yet been conceived! But the mob doesn't understand this. Greatness is unbearable for her.".

    In 1814, a congress was convened in Vienna to decide the post-war system. The main roles at the congress were played by Russia, England and Austria. The territory of France was restored to its pre-revolutionary borders. A significant part of Poland, along with Warsaw, became part of Russia.

    At the end of the Congress of Vienna, at the suggestion of Alexander I, the Holy Alliance was created to jointly fight the revolutionary movement in Europe. Initially, it included Russia, Prussia and Austria, and later many European states joined them.

    Holy Alliance- a conservative union of Russia, Prussia and Austria, created with the aim of maintaining the international order established at the Congress of Vienna (1815). The statement of mutual assistance of all Christian sovereigns, signed on September 14 (26), 1815, was subsequently gradually joined by all the monarchs of continental Europe, except the Pope and the Turkish Sultan. Not being, in the exact sense of the word, a formalized agreement between the powers that would impose certain obligations on them, the Holy Alliance, nevertheless, went down in the history of European diplomacy as “a cohesive organization with a sharply defined clerical-monarchist ideology, created on the basis of the suppression of revolutionary sentiments, wherever they never showed up."

    After the overthrow of Napoleon and the restoration of pan-European peace, among the powers that considered themselves completely satisfied with the distribution of “rewards” at the Congress of Vienna, the desire to preserve the established international order arose and strengthened, and the means for this was the permanent union of European sovereigns and the periodic convening of international congresses. But since the achievement of this was contradicted by the national and revolutionary movements of peoples seeking freer forms of political existence, such aspiration quickly acquired a reactionary character.

    The initiator of the Holy Alliance was the Russian Emperor Alexander I, although when drawing up the act of the Holy Alliance, he still considered it possible to patronize liberalism and grant a constitution to the Kingdom of Poland. The idea of ​​a Union arose in him, on the one hand, under the influence of the idea of ​​becoming a peacemaker in Europe by creating a Union that would eliminate even the possibility of military clashes between states, and on the other hand, under the influence of the mystical mood that took possession of him. The latter also explains the strangeness of the very wording of the union treaty, which was not similar either in form or in content to international treaties, which forced many specialists in international law to see in it only a simple declaration of the monarchs who signed it.


    Signed on September 14 (26), 1815 by three monarchs - Emperor Francis I of Austria, King Frederick William III of Prussia and Emperor Alexander I, at first it did not arouse anything other than hostility towards itself in the first two.

    The content of this act was extremely vague and flexible, and the most varied practical conclusions could be drawn from it, but its general spirit did not contradict, but rather favored, the reactionary mood of the then governments. Not to mention the confusion of ideas belonging to completely different categories, in it religion and morality completely displace law and politics from the areas that undoubtedly belong to the latter. Built on the legitimate basis of the divine origin of monarchical power, it establishes a patriarchal relationship between sovereigns and peoples, and the former are charged with the obligation to rule in the spirit of “love, truth and peace,” and the latter must only obey: the document does not at all talk about the rights of the people in relation to power mentions.

    Finally, obliging sovereigns to always “ give each other aid, reinforcement and help", the act does not say anything about exactly in what cases and in what form this obligation should be carried out, which made it possible to interpret it in the sense that assistance is obligatory in all those cases when subjects show disobedience to their “legitimate” sovereigns.

    This is exactly what happened - the very Christian character of the Holy Alliance disappeared and only the suppression of the revolution, whatever its origin, was meant. All this explains the success of the Holy Alliance: soon all other European sovereigns and governments joined it, not excluding Switzerland and the German free cities; Only the English Prince Regent and the Pope did not sign to it, which did not prevent them from being guided by the same principles in their policies; only the Turkish Sultan was not accepted into the Holy Alliance as a non-Christian sovereign.

    Signifying the character of the era, the Holy Alliance was the main organ of the pan-European reaction against liberal aspirations. Its practical significance was expressed in the resolutions of a number of congresses (Aachen, Troppaus, Laibach and Verona), at which the principle of intervention in the internal affairs of other states was fully developed with the aim of forcibly suppressing all national and revolutionary movements and maintaining the existing system with its absolutist and clerical-aristocratic trends.

    74. Foreign policy of the Russian Empire in 1814–1853.

    Option 1. In the first half of the 19th century. Russia had significant capabilities to effectively solve its foreign policy problems. They included the protection of their own borders and expansion of territory in accordance with the geopolitical, military-strategic and economic interests of the country. This implied the folding of the territory of the Russian Empire within its natural borders along the seas and mountain ranges and, in connection with this, the voluntary entry or forcible annexation of many neighboring peoples. The Russian diplomatic service was well-established, and its intelligence service was extensive. The army numbered about 500 thousand people, was well equipped and trained. Russia's military-technical lag behind Western Europe was not noticeable until the early 50s. This allowed Russia to play an important and sometimes decisive role in the European concert.

    After 1815, the main task of Russian foreign policy in Europe was to maintain the old monarchical regimes and fight the revolutionary movement. Alexander I and Nicholas I were guided by the most conservative forces and most often relied on alliances with Austria and Prussia. In 1848, Nicholas helped the Austrian emperor suppress the revolution that broke out in Hungary and strangled revolutionary protests in the Danube principalities.

    In the south, very difficult relations developed with the Ottoman Empire and Iran. Türkiye could not come to terms with the Russian conquest at the end of the 18th century. Black Sea coast and, first of all, with the annexation of Crimea to Russia. Access to the Black Sea was of particular economic, defensive and strategic importance for Russia. The most important problem was to ensure the most favorable regime for the Black Sea straits - the Bosporus and Dardanelles. The free passage of Russian merchant ships through them contributed to the economic development and prosperity of the vast southern regions of the state. Preventing foreign military vessels from entering the Black Sea was also one of the tasks of Russian diplomacy. An important means of Russia's intervention in the internal affairs of the Turks was the right it received (under the Kuchuk-Kainardzhi and Yassy treaties) to protect Christian subjects of the Ottoman Empire. Russia actively used this right, especially since the peoples of the Balkans saw in it their only protector and savior.

    In the Caucasus, Russia's interests collided with the claims of Turkey and Iran to these territories. Here Russia tried to expand its possessions, strengthen and make stable the borders in Transcaucasia. A special role was played by Russia’s relationship with the peoples of the North Caucasus, whom it sought to completely subordinate to its influence. This was necessary to ensure free and safe communication with the newly acquired territories in Transcaucasia and the lasting inclusion of the entire Caucasian region within the Russian Empire.

    To these traditional directions in the first half of the 19th century. new ones were added (Far Eastern and American), which at that time were of a peripheral nature. Russia developed relations with China and the countries of North and South America. In the middle of the century, the Russian government began to look closely at Central Asia.

    Option 2. In September 1814 – June 1815, the victorious powers decided on the issue of the post-war structure of Europe. It was difficult for the allies to come to an agreement among themselves, as sharp contradictions arose, mainly over territorial issues.

    The resolutions of the Congress of Vienna led to the return of old dynasties in France, Italy, Spain and other countries. The resolution of territorial disputes made it possible to redraw the map of Europe. The Kingdom of Poland was created from most of the Polish lands as part of the Russian Empire. The so-called “Viennese system” was created, which implied a change in the territorial and political map of Europe, the preservation of noble-monarchical regimes and European balance. Russian foreign policy was oriented towards this system after the Congress of Vienna.

    In March 1815, Russia, England, Austria and Prussia signed an agreement to form the Quadruple Alliance. He was aimed at implementing the decisions of the Congress of Vienna, especially as it related to France. Its territory was occupied by the troops of the victorious powers, and it had to pay a huge indemnity.

    In September 1815, Russian Emperor Alexander I, Austrian Emperor Franz and Prussian King Frederick William III signed the Act of Formation of the Holy Alliance.

    The Quadruple and Holy Alliances were created due to the fact that all European governments understood the need to achieve concerted action to resolve controversial issues. However, the alliances only muted, but did not remove the severity of the contradictions between the great powers. On the contrary, they deepened, as England and Austria sought to weaken the international authority and political influence of Russia, which had increased significantly after the victory over Napoleon.

    In the 20s of the XIX century. The European policy of the tsarist government was associated with the desire to counteract the development of revolutionary movements and the desire to shield Russia from them. Revolutions in Spain, Portugal and a number of Italian states forced members of the Holy Alliance to consolidate their forces in the fight against them. Alexander I's attitude towards revolutionary events in Europe gradually changed from restrained wait-and-see to openly hostile. He supported the idea of ​​collective intervention of European monarchs in the internal affairs of Italy and Spain.

    In the first half of the 19th century. The Ottoman Empire was experiencing a severe crisis due to the rise of the national liberation movement of its peoples. Alexander I, and then Nicholas I, were put in a difficult situation. On the one hand, Russia has traditionally helped its coreligionists. On the other hand, its rulers, observing the principle of preserving the existing order, had to support the Turkish Sultan as the legitimate ruler of their subjects. Therefore, Russia’s policy on the eastern question was contradictory, but, ultimately, the line of solidarity with the peoples of the Balkans became dominant.

    In the 20s of the XIX century. Iran, with the support of England, was actively preparing for war with Russia, wanting to return the lands it had lost in the Peace of Gulistan of 1813 and restore its influence in Transcaucasia. In 1826, the Iranian army invaded Karabakh. In February 1828, the Turkmanchay Peace Treaty was signed. According to it, Erivan and Nakhichevan became part of Russia. In 1828, the Armenian region was formed, which marked the beginning of the unification of the Armenian people. As a result of the Russian-Turkish and Russian-Iranian wars of the late 20s of the 19th century. The second stage in the annexation of the Caucasus to Russia was completed. Georgia, Eastern Armenia, Northern Azerbaijan became part of the Russian Empire.

    Holy Alliance (Russian); La Sainte-Alliance (French); Heilige Allianz (German).

    HOLY E NNY SO YU Z - the declared union of the Russian and Austrian emperors and the king of Prussia, the purpose of which was to maintain peace in Europe within the framework of the Versailles system.

    The initiative to create such a union was taken by the All-Russian Emperor Alexander I, and according to him, the Holy Alliance was not any formal union agreement (and was not formalized accordingly) and did not impose any formal obligations on its signatories. In the spirit of the Union, its participants, like three Christian monarchs, assumed moral responsibility for maintaining the existing order and peace, for which they were responsible not to each other (within the framework of the agreement), but to God. The union of the most powerful monarchs in Europe was supposed to eliminate the very possibility of military conflict between states.

    Signed by three monarchs by three monarchs - Emperor Franz I of Austria, King Frederick William III of Prussia, Emperor Alexander I of All Russia - on September 14 (26), 1815, the document on the creation of the Holy Alliance was in the nature of a declaration. (The text was also presented to the Prince Regent of Great Britain, George of Hanover, but he declined to join it under the pretext that, according to the English constitution, the king does not have the right to sign treaties with other powers.)

    The preamble stated the goals of the Union: “to open in the face of the universe their [monarchs] unshakable determination, both in the government of the states entrusted to them, and in political relations with all other governments, to be guided by no other rules than the commandments of this holy faith, the commandments of love, truth and peace." The declaration itself contained three points, the main meaning of which was as follows:

    In the 1st paragraph it was stated that “the three contracting monarchs will remain united by bonds of real and indissoluble brotherhood” and “in any case and in every place they will provide each other with assistance, reinforcement and assistance”; in addition, the monarchs promised “in relation to their subjects and troops, they, like fathers of families, will govern them in the same spirit of brotherhood that animates them, to preserve faith, peace and truth”;

    In the 2nd paragraph it was stated that the three empires are “members of a single Christian people,” in connection with which “their majesties ... convince their subjects from day to day to establish themselves in the rules and active fulfillment of duties in which the Divine Savior, the only a means of enjoying peace, which flows from a good conscience and which is lasting”;

    Finally, the 3rd paragraph declared that all states that agreed with the specified declaration could join the Union. (Subsequently, all the Christian monarchs of Europe gradually joined the union, except for England and the Pope, as well as the government of Switzerland, free cities, etc. The Ottoman Sultan, naturally, could not be accepted into the union, since he was not a Christian.)

    The main goal of Alexander I was an attempt to build European politics on the basis not of hypocritical politics, but of Christian values, from the point of view of which all controversial issues were to be resolved at the congresses of monarchs. The Holy Alliance was called upon to revive what was virtually lost by the beginning of the 19th century. in Europe the principle is that autocracy is service to the Almighty and nothing more. It was in the spirit, and not in the letter, of the Holy Alliance that the monarchs took upon themselves the obligation to assist each other in preserving the existing system, independently determining, without any pressure, the time and extent of such assistance. In fact, the point was that the fate of Europe would be decided by monarchs, whose power was entrusted by God's providence, and when making their decisions, they would not proceed from the narrow interests of their states, but on the basis of general Christian principles and in the interests of all Christian peoples. In this case, in place of politics, coalitions, intrigues, etc. Christian religion and morality came. The provisions on the Holy Alliance were based on the legitimate beginning of the divine origin of the power of monarchs and, as a consequence, the inviolability of the relationship between them and their people on the principles of “the sovereign is the father of his people” (i.e. the Sovereign is obliged to take care of his children by all means, and the people are obliged obey him completely). Later, at the Congress of Verona, Alexander I emphasized: “No matter what they do to constrain the Holy Alliance in its activities and suspect its goals, I will not give up on it. Everyone has the right to self-defense, and monarchs should also have this right against secret societies; I must defend religion, morality and justice."

    At the same time, specific obligations (including military) of the parties were contained in the agreement on the Quadruple Alliance (Russia, Great Britain, Austria and Prussia), both in relation to France and other legitimate monarchies. However, the Quadruple Alliance (“Quartet of Nations”) was not a “understudy” of the Holy Alliance and existed in parallel with it.

    The Holy Alliance owes its creation exclusively to Alexander I, the most powerful European monarch at that time. The remaining parties accepted the signing formally, since the document did not impose any obligations on them. The Austrian Chancellor, Prince Clemens von Metternich, wrote in his memoirs: “The Holy Alliance was not at all founded in order to limit the rights of peoples and favor absolutism and tyranny in any form. This Union was the only expression of the mystical aspirations of Emperor Alexander and the application of the principles of Christianity to politics."

    Aachen CongressHoly Alliance

    It was convened at the suggestion of Austria. Held from September 29 to November 22, 1818 in Aachen (Prussia), a total of 47 meetings took place; the main issues are the withdrawal of occupation forces from France, since the Treaty of Paris of 1815 stipulated that after three years the question of the advisability of further occupation of France would be considered.

    The delegations of European powers participating in the congress were headed by:

    Russian Empire: Emperor Alexander I, Minister of Foreign Affairs Count John Kapodistrias, Governor of the Foreign Collegium Count Karl Nesselrode;

    Austrian Empire: Emperor Franz I, Foreign Minister Prince Clemens von Metternich-Winneburg zu Beilstein;

    Kingdom of Prussia: King Frederick William III, State Chancellor Prince Karl August von Hardenberg, State and Cabinet Minister Count Christian Günther von Bernstorff

    United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland: Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs Robert Stewart Viscount Castlereagh, Field Marshal Arthur Wellesley 1st Duke of Wellington;

    France: President of the Council of Ministers and Minister of Foreign Affairs Armand Emmanuel du Plessis 5th Duke of Richelieu

    The participating countries expressed their interest in restoring France as one of the great powers and strengthening the regime of Louis XVIII on the principles of legitimacy, followed by a unanimous decision on September 30. France began to take part in the congress as a full member (the official registration of this fact, as well as the recognition of its fulfillment of its obligations under the treaty of 1815, was recorded in a note addressed to the Duke de Richelieu of the representatives of Russia, Austria, Great Britain and Prussia dated November 4, 1818. ). In addition, it was decided to sign a separate convention (in the form of bilateral agreements between France and each participating country signed in Aachen), which determined the deadline for the withdrawal of troops from France (November 30, 1818) and the balance of the indemnity (265 million francs).

    At the congress, Kapodistrias made a report on behalf of Russia, expressing the idea of ​​​​creating (on the basis of the Holy Alliance) a pan-European union, the decisions of which would have an advantage over the decisions of the Quadruple Alliance. However, this plan of Alexander I was blocked by Austria and Great Britain, who relied on the Quadruple Alliance as the most convenient form for defending their own national interests.

    Prussia, with the support of Russia, brought up for discussion the issue of concluding a pan-European agreement that would guarantee the inviolability of state borders established by the Congress of Vienna. Despite the interest of the majority of participants in this treaty, the British delegation opposed it. Consideration of the project was postponed, and later it was never returned to.

    Separately, the issue of Spain's participation in the congress and its request for mediation in negotiations for an uprising in the Spanish colonies in South America (and, in case of failure, for armed assistance) was discussed. Great Britain, Austria and Prussia opposed it, and the Russian delegation declared only “moral support.” In this regard, no decision was made on these issues.

    In addition, a number of issues related not only to Europe, but also to the world order were discussed at the congress. Among these were: on strengthening measures to supervise Napoleon, on Danish-Swedish-Norwegian disagreements, on ensuring the safety of merchant shipping, on measures to suppress the trade of blacks, on the civil and political rights of Jews, on disagreements between the Netherlands and the ruler of the Duchy of Bouillon, on Bavarian-Baden territorial dispute, etc.

    Nevertheless, a number of quite important decisions were made at the Aachen congress, incl. were signed:

    Declaration to all European courts on the inviolability of the Holy Alliance and the recognition of their main duty to strictly follow the principles of international law;

    Protocol on the procedure for considering claims brought by French subjects against the Allied powers;

    Protocol on the sanctity of concluded treaties and on the right of states whose matters will be discussed at future negotiations to take part in them;

    Two secret protocols confirming the provisions of the Quadruple Alliance, incl. providing for a number of specific measures in the event of a new revolution in France.

    Congress in Troppau

    It was convened on the initiative of Austria, which raised the issue of the development of the revolutionary movement in Naples in July 1820. It was held from October 20 to December 20, 1820 in Troppau (now Opava, Czech Republic).

    Russia, Austria and Prussia sent representative delegations to the congress, which were headed by Emperor Alexander I, Foreign Minister Count I. Kapodistrias, Emperor Franz I, Prince K. von Metternich, Crown Prince Friedrich Wilhelm of Prussia and K.A. von Hardenburg, while Great Britain and France limited themselves to envoys.

    Austria demanded the intervention of the Holy Alliance in the affairs of those countries in which there was a danger of a revolutionary coup. In addition to the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies, there was talk of sending troops to Spain and Portugal, where after the Napoleonic Wars there was a strong republican movement.

    On November 19, the monarchs of Austria, Russia and Prussia signed a protocol that stated the need for outside intervention in the event of an intensification of the revolution, since only in this way is it possible to maintain the status quo established by the Congress of Vienna. Great Britain was categorically against it. In this regard, no general agreement was reached (and, accordingly, no general documents were signed) on the issues of military intervention in the affairs of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. However, the parties agreed to meet on January 26, 1821 in Laibach and continue the discussion.

    Laibach Congress

    Became a continuation of the congress in Troppau. Took place from January 26 to May 12, 1821 in Laibach (now Ljubljana, Slovenia). The composition of the participants was almost the same as at the congress in Troppau, with the exception that the Prussian Crown Prince Friedrich Wilhelm was absent, and Great Britain limited itself to sending a diplomatic observer. In addition, the King of the Two Sicilies, Ferdinand I, was also invited to the congress, since the situation in his kingdom was discussed.

    Ferdinand I made a request for military intervention, which was opposed by France, which also presented appeals from other Italian states. It was decided that the King of the Two Sicilies should repeal the liberal constitution he had adopted (which introduced the principle of popular sovereignty), despite the fact that he had sworn allegiance to it. Agreement was given to send Austrian troops to Naples, and, if necessary, also Russians. After this decision was made, representatives of France and Great Britain no longer participated in the congress. Although Ferdinand I did not abolish the constitution, Austrian troops restored order in the kingdom (there was no need to send Russian troops).

    Also at the congress, the participants recommended that France send troops to Spain to fight the revolutionary movement, but, in principle, to clarify the situation with the revolutionary movement in Spain and Greece, it was decided to convene the next congress in Verona. Before its convocation, K. von Metternich convinced Alexander I not to provide assistance to the Greek uprising.

    Verona Congress

    The initiative to hold the congress was taken in June 1822 by Austria. Took place from October 20 to December 14, 1822 in Verona (Austrian Empire). This congress of the Holy Alliance.

    The delegations of leading European powers were headed by:

    Russian Empire: Emperor Alexander I, Foreign Minister Count Karl Nesselrode;

    Austrian Empire: Emperor Franz I, Foreign Minister Prince K. von Metternich;

    Kingdom of Prussia: King Frederick William III, Chancellor Prince K.A. von Hardenberg;

    United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland: Field Marshal Arthur Wellesley 1st Duke of Wellington, Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs George Canning;

    Kingdom of France: Foreign Minister Duke Mathieu de Montmorency-Laval and Ambassador to Berlin Viscount François René de Chateaubriand;

    Representatives of the Italian states: King of Piemnota and Sardinia Charles Felix, King of the Two Sicilies Ferdinand I, Grand Duke of Tuscany Ferdinand III, Papal Legate Cardinal Giuseppe Spina.

    The main issue discussed at the congress was the question of suppressing the revolutionary movement in Spain with the help of French troops. If the expedition was launched, France expected to enlist the “moral and material support” of the Holy Alliance. Russia, Austria and Prussia came out in support of it, declaring their readiness to sever diplomatic relations with the revolutionary government; Great Britain advocated limiting itself only to the concentration of French troops on the Franco-Spanish border without open intervention. On November 17, a secret protocol was formulated and signed on November 19 (Great Britain refused to sign under the pretext that the document could pose a danger to the life of the Spanish royal family), which provided for the introduction of French troops into Spain in the following cases:

    An armed attack by Spain on French territory or "an official act on the part of the Spanish government directly causing the indignation of the subjects of one or the other of the powers";

    Dethronement of the King of Spain or attacks against him or members of his family;

    - “a formal act of the Spanish government that violates the legal hereditary rights of the royal family.” (In April 1823, France sent troops into Spain and suppressed the revolutions.)

    A number of the following issues were also discussed at the congress:

    On recognition of the independence of former Spanish colonies in America; France and Great Britain actually supported recognition, the rest were against it. As a result, no decisions were made;

    About the situation in Italy. A decision was made to withdraw the Austrian auxiliary corps from Italy;

    About the slave trade. On November 28, a protocol was signed by the five powers confirming the provisions of the declaration of the Congress of Vienna on the prohibition of trade in blacks and the convening of the London Conference on the Slave Trade;

    About relations with the Ottoman Empire. Russia secured a promise of diplomatic support from the powers in its demands to Constantinople: respect the rights of the Greeks, announce the withdrawal of its troops from the Danube principalities, lift restrictions on trade and ensure freedom of navigation in the Black Sea;

    On the abolition of customs restrictions imposed by the Netherlands on the Rhine. All parties agreed on the need to take these measures, which was expressed in notes sent to the government of the Netherlands at the end of the congress;

    Collapse of the Holy Alliance

    The initiative to convene a new congress was taken at the end of 1823 by King Ferdinand VII of Spain, who proposed to discuss measures to counter the revolutionary movement in the Spanish colonies in Latin America. Austria and Russia supported the proposal, but Great Britain and France opposed it, as a result of which the congress scheduled for 1824 did not take place.

    After the death of the main initiator of the creation of the Holy Alliance, Emperor Alexander I (1825), his position began to gradually weaken, especially since the contradictions between the various great powers gradually worsened. On the one hand, the interests of Great Britain finally diverged from the goals of the Holy Alliance (especially in connection with the revolutionary movement in Latin America), on the other, Russian-Austrian contradictions in the Balkans intensified. The great powers were never able to develop a unified position on the revolution of 1830 in France and the accession of Louis Philippe d'Orléans. In the 1840s The struggle between Austria and Prussia for dominance in the German Confederation intensified sharply.

    Nevertheless, true to its obligations, Russia in 1849, at the request of Austria, sent its troops to Hungary, which was swept by the revolution, which became one of the decisive factors in restoring order there and preserving the Habsburg dynasty on the Hungarian throne. After this, Russia quite reasonably counted on support from the participants of the Holy Alliance, but further aggravation of intra-European contradictions led to the outbreak of the Crimean War of 1853-1856. during which Great Britain, France and Sardinia came out against Russia on the side of the Ottoman Empire, and Austria and Prussia took an anti-Russian position. Although the ideas laid down by Alexander I as the basis for the Holy Alliance had long been ignored by the European powers, it has now become completely clear that there is no longer any “union of the monarchs of Europe”.