The declaration of mutual assistance of all Christian sovereigns, signed in October 1815, was subsequently gradually joined by all monarchs of continental Europe, except England, 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 close-knit organization with a sharply defined clerical-monarchist ideology, created on the basis of the suppression of revolutionary sentiments, wherever they never showed up."
History of creation
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 body of the pan-European reaction against liberal aspirations. Practical significance it 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 tendencies.
Congresses of the Holy Alliance
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 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 revolt, 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.
The overthrow of the monarchy in France in July 1830 and the outbreak of revolutions in Belgium and Warsaw forced Austria, Russia and Prussia to return to the traditions of the Holy Alliance, which was expressed, among other things, in the decisions taken at the Munich Congress of the Russian and Austrian emperors and the Prussian crown prince (r. .); nevertheless, the successes of the French and Belgian revolutions
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 in his opinion, 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 paragraph 2 it was stated that the three empires are “members one people Christian,” in connection with which “their majesties ... convince their subjects from day to day to establish themselves in the rules and active fulfillment of the duties in which the Divine Savior instructed people, as the only means of enjoying the peace that 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 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 actually lost to early XIX V. 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 specifically 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 was discussed. South America(and in case of failure - about armed assistance). 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, the congress discussed a whole series issues related not only to Europe, but also to the world order. 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 repeal the constitution, Austrian troops restored order in the kingdom (the dispatch of Russian troops was not required).
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 on 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 advocated recognition, while the rest were against it. As a result, no decisions were made;
About the situation in Italy. It was decided 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 members of the Holy Alliance, but a further aggravation of intra-European contradictions led to the beginning Crimean War 1853-1856 during which Great Britain, France and Sardinia acted 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 of 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”.
Congress of Vienna and "Holy Alliance"
Congress of Vienna 1814 – 1815
After the victory over the Napoleonic Empire in 1814, a congress met in Vienna European countries. The main role was played by Russia, England, Austria and Prussia. The French commissioner was also allowed to attend the behind-the-scenes meetings. All important issues were resolved at these meetings. The main goals of the congress participants were to restore, if possible, the former dynasties and the power of the nobility, to redistribute Europe in the interests of the victors and to fight the emerging new revolutionary movements. Disregarding the people, the victors shredded the map of Europe in their own interests; England retained the island of Malta and the former Dutch colonies - the island of Ceylon off the coast of India and the Cape Land in southern Africa. England's main success was the weakening of its main enemy, France, and the consolidation of British superiority at sea and in colonial conquests. Russia secured most of Poland.
The fragmentation of Germany was greatly reduced. Instead of more than two hundred small states, a German Confederation of 39 states was created. The largest of them were Austria and Prussia. The German Confederation had no government, no money, no army, no influence on international affairs.
The rich and economically developed provinces of the Rhineland and Westphalia became the possessions of Prussia. Some of the bourgeois orders introduced during Napoleon have been preserved there. Western Polish lands were also recognized as the possession of Prussia.
The territory of Austria increased significantly - its former possessions in Italy and a number of other lands were again transferred to it. The previous dynasty was restored in Piedmont, and Austrian dukes reigned in the small states of Northern Italy.
The temporal power of the pope over the Roman region was restored, and the former Bourbon dynasty was installed on the throne in the Kingdom of Naples. The Pope and the Neapolitan king ruled relying on Swiss mercenaries.
In Spain, the absolute monarchy and the Inquisition were restored. The persecution and execution of patriots - participants in the revolution of 1808 - 1814 - began.
Belgium was annexed to the Kingdom of the Netherlands. Switzerland regained the mountain passes leading to Italy and was declared a perpetually neutral state.
The territory of the Sardinian kingdom was increased, main part which was Piedmont with the city of Turin.
According to the peace treaty with France, concluded in 1815, its territory was returned to its previous borders. An indemnity of 700 million francs was imposed on her. Until it was paid, the northeastern part of France was to remain occupied by Allied troops.
England, Russia, Austria and Prussia renewed the military alliance with the obligation to prevent the restoration of the Bonaparte dynasty in France and to convene congresses from time to time to protect the order in Europe established after the Napoleonic wars.
"Holy Alliance"
In order to consolidate absolutism and noble reaction, European sovereigns, at the suggestion of Alexander I, in 1815 concluded the so-called “Holy Alliance” against revolutionary movements. Its participants pledged to help each other in suppressing revolutions, to support Christian religion. The Act of the “Holy Alliance” was signed by Austria, Prussia, and then almost all the monarchs of European states. England did not formally join the Holy Alliance, but actually supported the policy of suppressing revolutions.
In the early 20s. in Spain, the Kingdom of Naples and Piedmont, outbreaks broke out against absolutism bourgeois revolutions led by advanced officers. By decision of the “Holy Alliance” they were suppressed - in Italy by Austrian troops, and in Spain - by the French army. But it was impossible to perpetuate the absolutist feudal order. Revolutions and national liberation wars covered more and more countries and continents.
A universal gsm repeater can be ordered at - TVdelta.
activities congress sacred alliance
After the elimination of the domination of Europe by the Napoleonic Empire, a new system of international relations emerged, which went down in history under the name “Viennese”. Created by the decisions of the Congress of Vienna (1814-1815), it was supposed to ensure the preservation of the balance of power and peace in Europe.
After the overthrow of Napoleon and the restoration of extra-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 a permanent Union of Sovereigns and the periodic convening of congresses. Since this order could be threatened by national and revolutionary movements among peoples seeking new more free forms political existence, such a desire quickly acquired a reactionary character.
The slogan of the union, called the “sacred union,” was legitimism. The author and initiator of the “Holy Alliance” was the Russian emperor. activities congress sacred alliance
Alexander I, brought up in a liberal spirit, full of faith in his chosenness of God and not alien to good impulses, wanted to be known not only as a liberator, but also as a reformer of Europe. He was impatient to give the continent a new world order that could protect it from cataclysms. 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. This 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 international law specialists to see in it only a simple declaration of the monarchs who signed it.
Being one of the main creators of the Vienna system, he personally developed and proposed a scheme for peaceful coexistence, which provided for the preservation of the existing balance of power, the inviolability of forms of government and borders. It was based on wide circle ideas, primarily on the moral precepts of Christianity, which gave many reasons to call Alexander I an idealist politician. The principles were set out in the Act of Holy Alliance of 1815, drafted in Gospel style.
The Act of the Holy Alliance was signed on September 14, 1815 in Paris, by three monarchs - Francis I of Austria, Frederick William III of Prussia and Russian Emperor Alexander I. According to the articles of the Act of the Holy Alliance, the three monarchs intended to be guided by “the commandments of this holy faith, the commandments of love, truth and peace,” they “will remain united by the bonds of real and indissoluble brotherhood.” It was further said that “considering themselves as if they were foreigners, they, in any case and in every place, will begin to give each other assistance, reinforcement and help.” In other words, the Holy Alliance was a kind of mutual assistance agreement between the monarchs of Russia, Austria and Prussia, which was extremely broad in nature. The absolute rulers considered it necessary to affirm the very principle of autocracy: the document noted that they would be guided by “the commandments of God, as autocrats of the Christian people.” These wordings of the Act on the Union of the Supreme Rulers of the Three Powers of Europe were unusual even for the terms of the treaties of that time - they were affected by the religious beliefs of Alexander I, his belief in the sanctity of the treaty of monarchs.
At the stage of preparation and signing of the act of the Holy Alliance, disagreements appeared between its participants. The original text of the Act was written by Alexander I and edited by one of the prominent politicians of that era, Kapodistrias. But later it was edited by Franz I, and in fact by Metternich. Metternich believed that the original text could serve as a reason for political complications, since under the formulation of Alexander I “subjects of the three contracting parties,” subjects were, as it were, recognized as legal bearers along with the monarchs. Metternich replaced this formulation with “three contracting monarchs.” As a result, the Act of Holy Alliance was signed as amended by Metternich, taking a more frank form of protecting the legitimate rights of monarchical power. Under the influence of Metternich, the Holy Alliance became a league of monarchs against nations.
The Holy Alliance became the main concern of Alexander I. It was the tsar who convened the congresses of the Union, proposed issues for the agenda and largely determined their decisions. There is also a widespread version that the head of the Holy Alliance, the “coachman of Europe” was the Austrian Chancellor K. Metternich, and the tsar was supposedly a decorative figure and almost a toy in the hands of the chancellor. Metternich really played an outstanding role in the affairs of the Union and was its (and not the whole of Europe) “coachman,” but in this metaphor, Alexander must be recognized as a rider who trusted the coachman while he was driving in the direction the rider needed.
Within the framework of the Holy Alliance, Russian diplomacy in 1815 gave highest value political relations with two German states - the Austrian Empire and the Kingdom of Prussia, hoping with their support to solve all other international problems that remained unresolved at the Congress of Vienna. This does not mean that the St. Petersburg cabinet was completely satisfied with relations with Vienna and Berlin. It is very characteristic that in the preamble of the two drafts of the Act one and the same idea was conveyed about the need to “completely change the image of relations between the powers, which they previously adhered to,” “to subordinate the subject powers to the image of mutual relations with the lofty truths inspired by the eternal law of God the Savior.”
Metternich criticized the Act of the Union of the Three Monarchs, calling it “empty and meaningless” (verbiage).
According to Metternich, who was initially suspicious of the Holy Alliance, this “even in the thoughts of its culprit to be only a simple moral manifestation, in the eyes of the other two sovereigns who gave their signatures, did not have such a meaning,” and subsequently: “some parties, hostile sovereigns, only referred to this act, using it as a weapon in order to cast a shadow of suspicion and slander on the purest intentions of their opponents.” Metternich also assures in his memoirs that “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. The idea of sacred union arose from a mixture liberal ideas, religious and political." Metternich considered this treaty to be devoid of all practical meaning.
However, Metternich subsequently changed his mind about the “empty and boring document” and very skillfully used the sacred Union for his reactionary purposes. (When Austria needed to gain Russian support in the fight against revolution in Europe and, in particular, to strengthen the position of the Habsburgs in Germany and Italy. The Austrian Chancellor was directly involved in the conclusion of the Holy Alliance - there was a draft document with his notes, Austrian court approved it).
Article No. 3 of the Act of the Holy Alliance states that "all powers who wish to solemnly acknowledge these principles will be admitted with the greatest readiness and sympathy into this Holy Alliance."
In November 1815 he joined the Holy Alliance french king Louis XVIII, and later most of the monarchs of the European continent joined him. Only England and the Vatican refused to sign. The Pope viewed this as an attack on his spiritual authority over Catholics.
And the British cabinet greeted Alexander I’s idea of creating a Holy Alliance of European monarchs with him at its head with restraint. And although, according to the king’s plan, this union was supposed to serve the cause of peace in Europe, the unity of monarchs, and the strengthening of legitimacy, Great Britain refused to participate in it. She needed "free hands" in Europe.
The English diplomat, Lord Castlereagh, stated that it was impossible “to advise the English regent to sign this treaty, since the parliament, consisting of positive people, can only give its consent to some practical treaty of subsidies or alliance, but will never give it to a simple declaration biblical truths that would take England into the era of St. Cromwell and round heads."
Castlereagh, who made a lot of efforts to ensure that Great Britain remained aloof from the Holy Alliance, also named the leading role of Alexander I in its creation as one of the reasons for this. In 1815 and in subsequent years, Great Britain - one of Russia's main rivals in the international arena - did not at all contribute to the strengthening of the Holy Alliance, but skillfully used its activities and the decisions of its congresses to its advantage. Although Castlereagh continued to verbally condemn the principle of intervention, in reality he supported a harsh counter-revolutionary strategy. Metternich wrote that the policy of the Holy Alliance in Europe was reinforced by England's protective influence on the continent.
Along with Alexander I, an active role in the Holy Alliance was played by the Austrian Emperor Franz I and his Chancellor Metternich, as well as the Prussian King Frederick William III.
By creating the Holy Alliance, Alexander I wanted to unite European countries into an integral structure, subordinate the relationships between them moral principles, drawn from the Christian religion, including the fraternal mutual assistance of sovereigns in protecting Europe from the consequences of human “imperfections” - wars, unrest, revolutions.
The goals of the sacred alliance were to ensure the inviolability of the decisions of the Vienna Congress of 1814 - 1815, as well as to wage a struggle against all manifestations of the “revolutionary spirit”. The Emperor declared that the highest purpose of the Holy Alliance was to make such "protective precepts" as the "principles of peace, concord and love" the foundation of international law."
In fact, the activities of the Holy Alliance focused almost entirely on the fight against the revolution. The key points of this struggle were the periodically convened congresses of the heads of the three leading powers of the Holy Alliance, which were also attended by representatives of England and France. Alexander I and Clemens Metternich usually played the leading role at the congresses. Total congresses of the Holy Alliance. there were four - the Aachen Congress of 1818, the Troppau Congress of 1820, the Laibach Congress of 1821 and the Verona Congress of 1822.
The powers of the Holy Alliance stood entirely on the basis of legitimism, i.e., the most complete restoration of the old dynasties and regimes that had been overthrown French revolution and the armies of Napoleon, and proceeded from the recognition of an absolute monarchy. The Holy Alliance was the European gendarme that kept the European peoples in chains.
The agreement on the creation of the Holy Alliance fixed the understanding of the principle of legitimism as preserving the “old regime” at any cost, i.e. feudal-absolutist orders.
But there was another, de-ideologized understanding of this principle, according to which legitimism essentially became synonymous with the concept of European balance.
This is how one of the founding fathers of the system, French Foreign Minister Charles Talleyrand, formulated this principle in his report on the results of the Congress of Vienna: “The principles of the legitimacy of power must be consecrated, first of all, in the interests of the people, since only some legitimate governments are strong, and the rest , relying only on force, fall themselves as soon as they are deprived of this support, and thus plunge peoples into a series of revolutions, the end of which cannot be foreseen... the congress will crown its labors and replace fleeting alliances, the fruit of transient needs and calculations, with a permanent system of joint guarantees and general balance... The order restored in Europe would be placed under the protection of all interested countries, which could... by joint efforts suppress all attempts to violate it at their very beginning."
Without officially recognizing the act of the Holy Alliance, which may have had an anti-Turkish connotation (the Union united only three states, whose subjects professed the Christian religion, was considered by the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire as Russia’s intention to capture Constantinople), the British Secretary of State Castlereagh agreed with his general idea of the need for a coordinated policies of European powers to prevent wars. Other participants in the Congress of Vienna shared the same opinion, and they preferred to express it in a more generally accepted and understandable form of an international legal document. This document became the Treaty of Paris on November 20, 1815.
The monarchs abandoned the soil of abstractions and vague mystical phraseology and on November 20, 1815, four powers - England, Austria, Russia and Prussia - signed an alliance treaty, the so-called Second Treaty of Paris. This treaty stated the formation of a new European system, the foundation of which was the alliance of the Four - Russia, England, Austria and Prussia, which assumed control over the affairs of Europe in the name of preserving peace.
Castlereagh played an important role in the development of this agreement. He is the author of Article 6, which provided for the periodic convening of meetings of representatives of the great powers at top level to discuss “common interests” and measures to ensure the “peace and prosperity of nations.” Thus, the four great powers laid the foundation for a new “security policy” based on constant mutual contacts.
From 1818 until his resignation in 1848, Metternich sought to maintain the system of absolutism created by the Holy Alliance. He summed up all efforts to expand the foundations or change the forms of government by one yardstick, considering them to be the product of the revolutionary spirit. Metternich formulated the basic principle of his policy after 1815: “In Europe there is only one problem - revolution.” Fear of revolution and the fight against the liberation movement largely determined the actions of the Austrian minister both before and after the Congress of Vienna. Metternich called himself a “doctor of revolutions.”
IN political life The Holy Alliance can be distinguished into three periods. The first period - actual omnipotence - lasted seven years - from September 1815, when the Union was created, until the end of 1822. The second period begins in 1823, when the Holy Alliance achieved its last victory by organizing an intervention in Spain. But then the consequences of the rise to power of George Canning, who became a minister back in mid-1822, began to appear sharply. The second period lasts from 1823 until the July Revolution of 1830 in France. Canning deals a series of blows to the Holy Alliance. After the revolution of 1830, the Holy Alliance, in essence, already lies in ruins.
During the period from 1818 to 1821, the Holy Alliance showed the greatest energy and courage in pursuing a counter-revolutionary program. But even during this period, his policy did not at all develop the unity of views and cohesion that could be expected from states united under such a loud name. Each of the powers that were part of it agreed to fight the common enemy only at a time convenient for itself, in a suitable place and in accordance with its private interests.
Signifying the character of the era, the Holy Alliance was the main body of 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.
an alliance of European monarchs concluded after the collapse of the Napoleonic Empire. T.n. The act of S. s., clothed in religious-mystical. form, was signed on September 26. 1815 in Paris Russian imp. Alexander I, Austrian imp. Francis I and Prussian King Frederick William III. 19 Nov 1815 to S. s. French joined. King Louis XVIII, and then most of the monarchs of Europe. England, which did not join the Union, supported the policy of the Socialist Union on a number of issues, especially in the first years of its existence, English. representatives were present at all congresses of the Socialist Union. The most important tasks of S. s. were the struggle against the revolutionaries. and national liberation. movements and ensuring the inviolability of the decisions of the Congress of Vienna 1814-15. At the periodically convened congresses of Socialist Socialists. (see Congress of Aachen 1818, Congress of Troppau 1820, Congress of Laibach 1821, Congress of Verona 1822) the leading role was played by Metternich and Alexander I. January 19. 1820 Russia, Austria and Prussia signed a protocol proclaiming the right to arm them. interference in internal affairs of other states in order to fight the revolution. The practical expression of S.'s policy. there were Carlsbad resolutions of 1819. In accordance with the decisions of S. s. Austria carried out armament. intervention and suppressed the Neapolitan Revolution of 1820-21 and the Piedmontese Revolution of 1821, France - Spanish revolution 1820-23. In subsequent years, contradictions between S. s. and England due to the difference in their positions regarding the war for Spanish independence. colonies in Lat. America, and then between Russia and Austria on the issue of attitude towards the Greek. national liberation uprising 1821-29. Despite all the efforts of S., revolutionary. and will free you. movements in Europe were shaking this alliance. In 1825, the Decembrist uprising took place in Russia. In 1830, revolutions broke out in France and Belgium, and an uprising (1830-31) against tsarism began in Poland. Under these conditions, S. s. actually fell apart. Attempts to restore it (the signing of the Berlin Treaty between Russia, Austria and Prussia in October 1833) ended in failure. During 19 and at the beginning. 20th centuries (except for the period immediately following the formation of the Socialist Union), historiography was dominated by negative assessments of the activities of this reactionary union. monarchs. In defense of S. s. Only a few court and clerical historians spoke, who had only a weak influence on general development historiography. In the 20s 20th century the “rewriting” of the history of the village began, which acquired a particularly wide scale after World War II. First of all, the existing history was subject to revision. liter assessment ch. figures of the Congress of Vienna and S. s. (historians - C. Webster, G. Srbik, G. Nicholson), and the role of the “great European” Metternich (A. Cecil, A. G. Haas, G. Kissinger) is especially praised. Congress of Vienna and S. s. are declared to personify the vitality of conservatism, its ability to preserve established social foundations after turbulent societies. shocks (J. Pirenne). To the special credit of S. s. The suppression of the revolution is being carried out. and will free you. movements of peoples. It is emphasized that the leaders of S. s. “for the first time in history” they created “supranational and supraparty” institutions (by which, first of all, socialist congresses are meant), which ensured the creation of an “effective mechanism” “for maintaining order and preventing chaos in Europe” (T. Shider, R. A. Kann). Thus, reaction. the authors see the special value of S. s. in that he carried out an organized “export of counter-revolution,” which today is the most important component of the program of the extreme imperialists. strength Carrying out dubious historical parallels, the latest imperialist. historians consider S. s. as a distant predecessor and herald of the “integration of Europe” and the North Atlantic bloc. It is emphasized that NATO will have to ensure agreement between Ch. capitalistic powers. In this regard, attention is paid to the attempts that have taken place to attract villagers to participate in S. USA (Pirenne). It is noteworthy that some historians (Kissinger and others) strive to prove that the experience of S. with. indicates the possibility of peaceful coexistence only of socially homogeneous states. It is characteristic that most of the newest bourgeois. works about S. s. is not research, but based on very meager source data. the basis of socio-political reasoning, the purpose of which is to substantiate the modern ideology and practice of imperialist reaction. Lit.: Marx K. and Engels F., Russian note, Works, 2nd ed., vol. 5, p. 310; Marx K., The exploits of the Hohenzollerns, ibid., vol. 6, p. 521; Engels F., The situation in Germany, ibid. vol. 2, p. 573-74; his, Debates on the Polish Question in Frankfurt, ibid., vol. 5, p. 351; Martens F., Collection of treatises and conventions concluded by Russia with foreign powers, vol. 4, 7, St. Petersburg, 1878-85; Treatise of the Fraternal Christian Union, PSZ, vol. 33 (SPB), 1830, p. 279-280; History of diplomacy, 2nd ed., vol. 1, M., 1959; Tarle E.V., Talleyrand, Soch., vol. 11, M., 1961; Narochnitsky A.L., International relations of European states from 1794 to 1830, M., 1946; Bolkhovitinov N. N., Monroe Doctrine. (Origin and character), M., 1959; Slezkin L. Yu., Russia and the War of Independence in Spanish America, M., 1964; Manfred A.Z., Socio-political ideas in 1815, "VI", 1966, M 5; Debidur A., Diplomatic History of Europe, trans. from French, vol. 1, M., 1947; Nadler V.K., Emperor Alexander I and the idea of the Holy Alliance, vol. 1-5, Riga, 1886-92; Soloviev S., The Age of Congresses, "BE", 1866, vol. 3-4; 1867, vol. 1-4; his, Emperor Alexander I. Politics - diplomacy, St. Petersburg, 1877; Bourquin M., Histoire de la Sainte-Alliance, Gen., 1954; Pirenne J. H., La Sainte-Alliance, t. 2, P., 1949; Kissinger H. A., World restored. Metternich, Castlereagh and the problems of peace 1812-1822, Bost., 1957; Srbik H. von, Metternich. Der Staatsmann und der Mensch, Bd 2, M?nch., 1925; Webster Ch. K., The foreign policy of Gastlereagh 1815-1822. Britain and the European Alliance, L., 1925; Schieder T., Idee und Gestalt des ?bernationalen Staats seit dem 19. Jahrhundert, "HZ", 1957, Bd 184; Schaeder H., Autokratie und Heilige Allianz, Darmstadt, 1963; Nicolson H., The Congress of Vienna. A study in Allied Unity. 1812-1822, L., 1946; Bartlett C. J., Castlereagh, L., 1966; Haas A. G., Metternich, reorganization and nationality, 1813-1818, "Ver?ffentlichungen des Institutes f?r Europ?ische Geschichte", Bd 28, Wiesbaden, 1963; Kann R. A., Metternich, a reappraisal of his impact on international relations, "J. of Modern History", 1960, v. 32; Kossok M., Im Schatten der Heiligen Allianz. Deutschland Und Lateinamerika, 1815-1830, V., 1964. L. A. Zak. Moscow.