Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2xdlg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-20T01:01:52.108Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Political Philosophy of Speranskij

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 January 2017

Marc Raeff
Marc Raeff*
Affiliation:
Far Eastern Institute, University of Washington
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

There is general agreement in the historical literature devoted to the reign of Alexander I that Mikhail Speranskij was the most outstanding political figure of the period. But far less agreement is shown when it comes to an appraisal of his political career and to a critical analysis of the basic intent of his reform proposals.

Some historians, like M. N. Pokrovskij for example, see him merely as a puppet in the hands of economic and social forces, the editorial secretary whose job it was to put into legal form the demands of the growing Russian bourgeoisie. Others, with less of a dogmatic socio-economic approach to history, see in him an intelligent imitator and adapter of French or other Western administrative models. The dean of modern Russian historiography, V. Kljucevskij, though recognizing Speranskij's significance and the interest presented by his personality, views him as a theoretician and “idéologue,” very little interested in either the practical results of his plans or the individual welfare of the people, garnering his abstract conceptions indiscriminately from the most disparate sources. And the “cadet” historian of nineteenth century Russia, Aleksandr Kornilov, considers Speranskij a genuine liberal constitutionalist who aimed at replacing an obsolete and tyrannical political system with a limited monarchy whose major features were his own invention.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Slavic and East European Review , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , February 1953 , pp. 1 - 21
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies 1953

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 M. N., Pokrovskij, Russkaja Istorija s drevnejšikh vremёn (Moscow, 1933), III, 174 ff.Google Scholar Also in his Russkaja lstorija v sžatom siatom očerke (5th ed., Moscow, 1934), Parts I–II, pp. 113, 115.Google Scholar It is interesting to note that this view is still followed by M. V. Nečkina in the recently published “official” history of the USSR: Institut Istorii Akademii Nauk, Neckina, M. V., ed., lstorija SSSR (2d ed., Moscow, 1949), II, 62–63.Google Scholar

2 For instance, to mention works accessible to the non-Russian reader: A.Kizevetter, in Milioukov, P., Seignobos, Ch., and Eisenmann, L., Histoire de Russie (Paris, 1932), II, 670–73Google Scholar; Karl, Stählin, Geschichte Russlands von den Anfängen bis zur Gegenwart (Königsberg Pr. and Berlin, 1935), III, 157, 163 ff.Google Scholar

3 V., Ključevskij, Kurs russkoj istorii (Moscow, 1937), V, 275–76, 284–85Google Scholar.

4 Kornilov, A., Modern Russian History, A. S. Kaun, , tr. (New York, 1943), pp. 130 ff.Google Scholar.

5 Baron M. A. Korff, Žizn' grafa Speranskogo (St. Petersburg, 1861).

6 Plan preobrazovanija grafa M. M. Speranskogo (Russkaja Mysl', Moscow, 1905).

7 The formal connection between Speranskij's projects of 1802-1804 and his work in the “Committee of December 6, 1826” has been shown by Syromjatnikov in one of the rare articles on Speranskij to appear in Soviet Russia: B. Syromjatnikov, “M. M. Speranskij kak gosudarstvennyj i političeskij dejatel',” Sovetskoe Gosudarstvo i Pravo, No. 3, 1940, pp. 92-113.

8 Dovnar-Zapol'skij, M. V., “Političeskie idealy M. M. Speranskogo,” in Iz istorii obščestvennykh tečenij v Rossii (Kiev, 1905), pp. 77–144.Google Scholar It is, by the way, a very interesting and thoughtful analysis.

9 The literature interpreting the character and meaning of the Plan of 1809 is too large to be listed here.

10 M. Speranskij, “Propoved’ 1791 g.,” Russkaja Starina, 109 (February, 1902), pp. 283-91.

11 Ibid. pp. 287, 288.

12 Ibid. p. 287.

13 Ibid. pp. 287–88, note.

14 We know, for example, that Speranskij was familiar with the writings of Nil Sorskij, cf. Katekov, I. V., “Graf M. M. Speranskij kak religioznyj myslitel',” Fravoslavnyj Sobesednik, 1889, Part II, p. 123, noteGoogle Scholar. On the political literature generated by the Volga Elders-Josephites controversy, see among others: D. S. Likhacev, KuVtura Rusi epokhi obrazovanija russkogo natsional'nogo gosudarstva (Moscow, 1946); V. Valdenberg, Drevnerusskie ucenija o predelakh tsarskoj vlasti (Petrograd, 1916); M. D'jakonov, Vlast1 Moskovskikh gosudarej (St. Petersburg, 1889). For a summary of the argumentation used, see my article “An Early Theorist of Absolutism—Joseph of Volokolamsk,” American Slavic and East European Review, VIII, No. 2 (April, 1949), 77–89.

15 Speranskij, Propoved', pp. 280-90.

16 The gradual transition to more practical issues of public administration can be followed in a paper Speranskij wrote in 1802, apparently at the request of some member of the Unofficial Committee. Unfortunately the full text of this report has not been published arid it is known to me only through the excerpts and summary in Semevskij, V. I.: “Pervyj političeskij traktat Speranskogo,” Russkoe Bogatstvo, No. 1, 1907, pp. 46–85.Google Scholar

17 Semevskij, V. I., “Iz istorii obščestvennykh tecenij v Rossii v XVIII i pervoj polovine XIX vv.,” Istoričeskoe Obozrenie, IX (1897), 270.Google Scholar

18 Speranskij, “O sile pravitel'stva,” Russkaja Starina, December, 1902, pp. 495-99.

19 The similarities between some of Speranskij's practical proposals in the plan of 1809 and the reform program of vom Stein are unmistakable. But this problem has not been worked out as yet by Russian historians and I have found only an allusion to it in the works of Staehlin and Dovnar-Zapol'skij, cited above. I intend to investigate this question in greater detail for the full-scale biography of Speranskij to which the present essay is a Vorarbeit.

20 On Speranskij's relations with Bentham and Dumont, see The Works of Jeremy Bentham, published under the superintendence of his executor, Bowring, John (Edinburgh, 1843), X, in particular 405-8 passim, 416, 542–43.Google Scholar Thus Dumont wrote of Speranskij in a letter to Romilly in August, 1803: “He loves his country and feels strongly that the reform of justice and of legislation is of all goods the highest good,” ibid., p. 408. For Bentham's connections with Russia, see Pypin, A., “Russkie otnošenija Bentama,” Očerki literatury i obščestvennosti pri Aleksandre lm. (Petrograd, 1917), II, 1–109 Google Scholar.

21 This is the actual meaning of Speranskij's advocacy of legality and separation of powers (really functions) in the Plan of 1809.

22 Cf. the introduction to the Plan of 1809; relevant passages are also quoted in Pypin, A., Die geistigen Bewegungen in Russland in der ersten Haelfte des 19. Jahrhunderts (Berlin, 1894), p. 212 Google Scholar. See also: Speranskij, , “Otčët v delakh za 1810 g.,” Sbornik Imperatorskogo istoričeskogo russkogo obščestva, XX (1877), 447–62Google Scholar.

23 Dovnar-Zapol'skij, op. cit., pp. 104–6.

24 Cf., for example, Semevskij, op. cit., p. 270.Google Scholar

25 I have attempted to describe the development of Speranskij's philosophical views in an article to appear in the near future.

See Katekov, I. V., “Graf M. M. Speranskij kak religioznyj myslitel',” Pravoslavnyj Sobesednik, Part II, 1889, pp. 82-96, 264–318, 428–44, 572–625, and Part III, pp. 122–52, 209–61, 412–39, 531–67Google Scholar; El'čaninov, A., “Misticizm Speranskogo,” Bogoslovskij Vestnik, January-February, 1906, pp. 90-123 and 207–45Google Scholar; same, “Misticizm Speranskogo,” Novyj Put', February, 1903, pp. 106–27. The material in these articles is briefly summarized also in Zen'kovskij, V. V., htorija russkoj filosofii (Paris, 1948), I,Google Scholar and Lossky, N. O., History of Russian Philosophy (New York, 1951), pp. 12–13.Google Scholar

26 Speranskij, “O vozraste obščestv i o soobraženii s nim mer zakonodatel'nykh,” in V pamjat’ grafa M. M. Speranskogo (St. Petersburg, 1872), p. 800. Hereafter referred to as Famjati….

27 Ibid.

28 lbid., p. 801.

29 Ibid.

30 In Burkian manner, Speranskij said: “The former [government measures] are easy but not durable, for they do not have guarantees [of prescription]. The latter [legislation] are difficult but enduring, for they are founded not on the letter [of the law] but on the living, active moral force,” see “Nužcly i želanija,” in pamjati…, p. 814.

31 Speranskiy, “O sile pravitel'stva,” op. cit., p. 496.Google Scholar

32 Speranskij, , “Ponjatie dobra i pol'zy,” Pravoslavnyj Sobesednik, Part III, 1889, p. 564.Google Scholar

33 “The confusion of sovereign right with lower rights (i.e., that of individuals and groups) is actually called despotism. It is not a special form of right but a confusion of rights, a blending of the divine with the human (miscet divina humanae), of the sovereign right and of the subject,” in “Pravo verkhovnoe,” Pamjati…, p. 802.

34 Ibid.

35 Ibid.; cf. also Semevskij, op. cit., p. 270.

36 Speranskij, , “O sile pravitel'stva,” op. cit., p. 496.Google Scholar

37 Ibid.

38 For Speranskij's interpretation of English constitutional practice in the light of this attitude, see his note “O smesannoj monarkhii,” in Famjati…, pp. 848-49. For Speranskij, separation of powers only meant a separation of functions; he was very far from any idea of mutual checks and balances.

39 If we follow the very interesting definition of Carl Schmitt-Dorotic (Politische Romantik [Muenchen-Leipzig, 1919]), this would exclude Speranskij from the category of “Romantic” political theorists, with whom he otherwise has quite a few features in common.

40 Speranskij, , “Ponjatie dobra i pol'zy,” op. cit., p. 565.Google Scholar

41 Speranskij, , “Mysli, želanija, strasti, dejanija,” in Pamjati…, p. 831.Google Scholar

42 Speranskij, , “Pravo verkhovnoe,” Pamjati…, p. 803, note.Google Scholar

43 Speranskij, , “Kogda nadležit pristupat’ k vydumkam v zakonakh?” in Pamjati…, p. 805.Google Scholar

44 Cf., Speranskij, “Istoričeskoe obozrenie izmenenii v prave pozemel'noj sobstvennosti i v sostojanii krestjan,” Sbornik Imperatorskogo istoričeskogo obščestva, XXX, 450–60Google Scholar; Semevskij, V. I., Krestjanskij vopros v Rossii v XVI11 i pervoj polovine XIX veka (St. Petersburg, 1888), I, 340–52, passim.Google Scholar

45 Speranskij, , “Pravo gosudarstvennoe,” in Pamjati…, p. 855.Google Scholar

46 Cf. the letter of Speranskij to Count V. P. Kočubej, dated May 20, 1820, in Pamjati…, p. 313; see also Speranskij's account of the influence of moral force in forcing a peasant guilty of arson to confess his crime (a very Dostojevskij-like situation) in a letter to A. Stolypin, dated December 4, 1817, in Russkij Arkhiv, 1870, pp. 1147–48.

47 Letters to F. Zeier, December 31, 1815 and January 11, 1816 in Korff, M. A., “Iz bumag o grafe Speranskom v dopolnenii k ego Žizni izdannoj v 1861 g.,” Russkij Arkhiv, V (1867), 444–53Google Scholar passim, and 453–54, respectively. The book referred to is some German mystical tract predicting a future of harmony for all nations under the law of Christ.

48 Letter to Alexander, I, dated January 6, 1816, in Sbornik materialov i-go otdelenija sobstvennoj Kantseljarii, E. I. V. (St. Petersburg, 1876), II, 38–39.Google Scholar

49 “O zakonakh—besedy grafa M. M. Speranskogo s E. I. V. Gosudarem Naslednikom Tsarevičem Velikim Knjazem Aleksandrom Nikolaevičem s 12 okt. 1835 P° IO aPr 1837,” in Sbornik Imperat. istoričeskogo obščestva (St. Petersburg, 1881), XXX, 323–491, hereafter referred to as “Besedy.“

50 “Besedy,” pp. 327-33 (Introduction), passim.

51 Cf. Speranskij's view of the ethical character of a ruler in his first sermon (note 12 above).

52 “Besedy,” p. 338.

53 Ibid., p. 334.

54 Ibid., p. 341; cf. also Semevskij, “Iz istorii obščestvennykh tečenij… ,” op. cit., p. 261.

55 “Besedy,” p. 342.

56 Ibid., p. 436. Here Speranskij uses the same words as in the quotation referred to in note 40. “

57 Ibid., p. 437.

58 Ibid., pp. 345–52 passim. Speranskij valued very highly Savigny's historical conception of law. On his relations to the German jurist, see P. M. Majkov, “Speranskij i studenty zakonovedenija,” Russkij Vestnik, Nos. 262-263 (1899), pp. 609-26, 239-57 and 637-83.

59 “Besedy,” p. 350.

60 Ibid., p. 367.

61 Ibid., p. 366.

62 Ibid., p. 367.

63 Ibid., p. 337.

64 “Fundamental laws can be effective without being written, they can be engraved in the mores, customs, they can be preserved in the institutions without a charter,” ibid., p. 359.

65 Ibid., p. 371.

66 “Zapiska o vnutrennem sostojanii Rossii, predstavlennaja Imperatoru Aleksandru Il-mu Aksakova,”, K. S. in Šarapov, S., ed., Teorija gosudarstva u slavjanofilov (St. Petersburg, 1898), pp. 22–44 Google Scholar.

67 For example, see: Aronson, M. and Rejser, S., Literaturnye kruźki i salony (Leningrad, 1929)Google Scholar; Bestuzev, M. A., “Zapiski,” Russkaja Starina, 32 (1881), p. 610 Google Scholar; N. L. Brodskij ed., Literaturnye salony i kruźki pervoj poloviny XIX v. (Moscow, 1930), in particular pp. 44, 88 Google Scholar; Zapiski A. J. Košeleva (Berlin, 1884), pp. 31-41 passim; Majkov, P. M., “Speranskij i studenty zakonovedenija,” op. cit. Pypin, A. N., Kharakteristiki literaturnykh mnenij ot 20-kh do 50-kh godov (2nd ed., Petersburg, St., 1890), pp. 209–19Google Scholar; F. F., Vigel'., Vospominanija (Moscow, 1928), in particular pp. 101–2, 174 Google Scholar.