The domestic policy of A.I. Osterman in the 1730s - early 1740s in the memories of his contemporaries

The article analyzes domestic political activities of A.I. Osterman in the memories of his contemporaries: H. Manstein, B.H. Minich, E.I. Biron, E. Minich, F.I. Soymonov, I.I. Neplyuev, J. P. Shakhovsky and the anonymous author of Remarks on the Notes of Manstein in the 1730s - early 1740s. This genre contains information that can not appear in the documents of state chancelleries. The memories include bright characteristics of Osterman's personal qualities. They promoted the creation of stereotypes about him as a court intriguer that are still relevant in historiography. The author makes an attempt to move away from stereotypes on the basis of the analysis, and, first of all, of facts about the political activities of Osterman. The study found that, on the one hand, Oster-man was the mastermind of the creation of the Cabinet of Ministers and of the restoration of Peter's Charter of succession, and took an active part in solving the problem of succession at the turn of the 1740s. On the other hand, in the 1730s he dealt with daily government routine to a great extent, did not offer his own projects of reform and did not enter into open conflicts with the authorities. During the short regency of Anna Leopoldovna when his main political rivals disappeared from the political scene he was able to show himself not only as an executor but also as an initiator of reforms. Before this time he concealed his private initiative under the name of the Cabinet of Ministers. Besides other things, Osterman wrote an extensive opinion in which he actually laid out the new program of the domestic policy. However, these changes killed him. He turned into a full-fledged member of the court struggle for power from a bureaucrat-executor taking off the mask of the depersonalizing public institution. As a result, his political career did not survive the next palace revolution. Because of this, his program devoted to the normalization of the domestic policy failed. As a result, Osterman remained in history primarily as a clever diplomat and a cunning court intriguer. It seems that it is connected with the formation and development of the higher bureaucracy of modern times. A bureaucratic status could provide greater career stability but gave less opportunities to promote one's own ideas. This status deprived of a personal character. Eventually, the bureaucrat had to put on the "clothes" of the court in a struggle for the attention of the monarch.

Keywords

Authors

References