Re: The Empress Alexandra Fights Back #3

It also occurs to me that Alix found the authority of Victoria (her sister, not her grandmother) rather easier to accept because V - in addition to being the beloved elder sister they all looked up to - had obvious faults: she was garrulous and plain and even rather gauche. Ella, on the other hand, was seen by her admirers as almost a perfect being: beautiful and good in every way. Having a sister like that dictate to you would create a rebellious mood in anyone!

Perhaps Victoria's authority was also easier to accept because Alix considered Victoria as the clever one in the family, which would have given V. some authority, and because Victoria did not pretend to be perfect, to be saintly or to have God on her side. Perhaps Victoria also exerted influence in a less pushy way. 

Ella once stated she wanted to be a perfect woman. She may have been beautiful and she may have done a lot of good for the poor and sick in Moscow, but her conduct en famille suggests to me that she was far from perfect and perhaps less wise than she herself may have thought. I think this and the rather blunt way in which she tried to impose her will at all cost undermined her authority.

There was a lot of jealousy there - a very primal, sisterly relationship, I think! It seems to me that Ella felt she had a right - both as an elder sister and as someone married to the all-knowing Serge - to tell N and A what to do. The tone of her 1901 letter to Nicholas in which she chides him for being weak takes my breath away. To her own brother she could joke about being bossy and call herself "Aunt Fuus", but this humour was rather absent from her relationship with N and A...

There's an interesting photo posted here lately that really is revealing of this, IMO.  I've searched but can't find it unfortunately.

In the photo Nicholas is seated in a chair, w/ the typical stiff pose for a photo, Alexandra is behind him to the left, again typically posed.  However Ella is leaning over Nicholas and the chair, with her hands on the chair, I think almost a smile on her face, clearly looking like she dominates the couple.  Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but to me the body language of this photo clearly shows Ella thought as Janet mentions above, and others have alluded to here.

T

Terence I think that below is the photo you are referring to.  I believe it was taken in 1899.  The Grand Duke Alexander included a photo of Alix in the same dotted Swiss and insertion lace afternoon gown and feathered toque on the balcony at Bernsdorff which Alix has signed and dated for 1899.  So I think it is safe to assume that the photo was taken in 1899.  I have another book with this photo but cannot manage to find it presently as most of my library is packed up. 



The body language in the photo is really interesting.  Thanks for your imput. 

Just to say that my progress on the Sept. 1915 correspondence is coming along but the file is twice the size of the Aug. 1915 correspondence.  The Empress doubled the volume of her letters in Sept.  Hopefully I will be able to post the correspondence for Sept. by this weekend.

The Empress doubled the volume of her letters in Sept. 

Any idea why?

You know that is a good question Historyfan because I would have assumed that the Aug. correspondence would have been heavier as this was the time that Alix was working so hard to support her husband's conviction that he should remove the Grand Duke Nicholai as Commander-In-Chief and replace him with General M. V. Alekseev with himself acting in an advisory capacity.  

I think that the volume of the Sept. 1915 correspondence has to do, in part, with changes that seemed necessary for several of the ministries and for the post of Over-Procurator.  I do hope that Matushka will help us sort through the complex issues involved with Varvarna and the canonization of John Maximovich.  

Perhaps the volume has increased because of question of appointing new Ministers and replacing the Over-Procurator and the problems with the Synod's rejection of John Maximovich.  Again, just to say, Matushka, really helped expand our understanding of Varnava and hopefully she will be able to help us understand the nature of the fight over the cannonization of John Maximovich, a local holy man who had been buried in the Cathederal in Tobol'sk.    

Just as a follow-up with Ella and Philippe which I found interesting.  Janet's point of view about Alix' pregnancy is that it was real and that Alix miscarried a two-month old fetus.  I had somehow or other alwasys assumed that the Empress had an hysterical pregnancy which is not correct. 

Lets see the way Janet worked out the miscarriage.  She frames the miscarriage in her work on the Empress by looking back on it after the successful birth of Alexis.  Janet has Alix remember how Alexis' birth:

…reaffirmed my faith in myself after the miscarriage which was so nasty and alarming.  August 1902, that was: I’d been pregnant as far as I am aware for nine months (fact is, M.B. never came back after I stopped nursing Anastasia, and at the same time as that happened I began to feel sick again).  I’d not seen a doctor (why should I?—I was an old hand by then, and the majority of women don’t see doctors when they are pregnant—it’s not an illness!)  and although the baby didn’t seem as lively as the others had done I had no reason to think anything was wrong.  But then instead of a baby, M.B. turned up as if it had never been absent; I went to the doctors and was told that there was no pregnancy, I was simply anaemic.  They were wrong, of course (unbelievably!): next day I had a miscarriage, but the baby was so tiny one might have supposed it a two months child—whereas I knew I’d carried it for nine.  ‘Missed abortion’ I think the horrible term is.  Either that or I had genuinely been anaemic for the first seven months but somehow it had been conceived anyway—no-one could give a proper explanation.  Something went badly wrong, perhaps it simply failed to grow.  [Ref: Janet Ashton, The German Woman, (2008), pp. 156-157]

Janet’s clearly done a great deal of careful reasoning from first source information such as Xenia’s letters to Princess A. Obolensky, née Apraksine which state that Dr. Ott at first thought that there was no pregnancy.  In her August 19, 1902 letter to the Princess Xenia states:

…it seems poor A. F. [Alix} isn’t pregnant after all—for 9 months she had nothing, then suddenly it came, but completely normally, without any pain.  The day before yesterday [August 18], Ott [Doctor] saw here for the first time and confirmed that there was no pregnancy, but that luckily everything internally was all right.  He say that such cases do happen, and are caused by anaemia.  [Ref: Andrei Maylunas and Sergei Mironenko, A Lifelong Passion, (1997), p. 217]

Then in her August 20 letter to the Princess, Xenia relates that:

…This morning A. F. [Alix} had a minor miscarriage—if it could be called a miscarriage at all!—that is to say a tiny ovule came out!  Yesterday evening she had pains, and at night too, by morning it was all over when this event happened!  Now at last it will be possible to make an announcement and tomorrow a bulletin will be published in the papers—with information about what happened.  At last a natural way out of this unfortunate situation has been found.  She is in bed—as a precaution, as there can sometimes be bleeding in such cases.  Thank God she is in good health.  [Ref: Andrei Maylunas and Sergei Mironenko, A Lifelong Passion, (1997), p. 217]

It seems almost cruel that the Empress Dowager and Xenia went after Alix and Nicky about Philippe.  Two days before the miscarriage, when Dr. Ott and Dr. Hirsh [Girsh] mistakenly diagnosed the young Empress as simply anaemic, Xenia relates that Alix had informed the Empress Dowager:

…herself and cried terribly. I did not see her yesterday all day…[Today] [a]fter breakfast I went with Mama to see the poor thing [Alix], and found her in a very sad mood, although she talks about it with great acceptance.  Apart from the personal sorrow and disappointment, what a blow it must have been to their pride!  Mama used the opportunity to speak frankly to Nicky about Ph.[ilippe]—she told him everything she had on her heart, but unfortunately only received rather vague explanations, although he said all the rumours were very much exaggerated, and so on.  I am glad for Mama that she at last spoke out, but the result of their conversation was not satisfactory!  [Ref: Andrei Maylunas and Sergei Mironenko, A Lifelong Passion, (1997), p. 217]

Xenia’s remarks seem almost heartless given the fragility and humiliation Dr. Ott’s misdiagnosis must have caused the Imperial couple.  Even the actual day of the miscarriage, August 20th , Xenia and the Empress Dowager used the opportunity to once again drill a very downhearted and emotionally and physically fatigued Nicky and Alix again over Philippe.  Xenia informs the Princess that:

Mama and I talked to them today about Ph.[ilippe], I felt very much relieved but unfortunately they once again failed to explain anything and were only surprised that everyone seems to think they are trying to conceal their friendship with Ph.[ilippe], when they never had any intention of keeping it a secret.  [Ref: Andrei Maylunas and Sergei Mironenko, A Lifelong Passion, (1997), p. 218]
 
Ella had been pounding Alix about Philippe as early as July 1902.  A month before her miscarriage, Nicky was obliged to return a visit to the German Emperor.  I believe the Kaiser’s son or nephew had just completed a visit to the Russian Court.  However I am not sure the exact nature of Nicky’s visit to the Kaiser.  None the less as he left on July 22, 1902 and it appears that Ella used his absence to dress down Alix’ for her friendship with Philippe:

We drove round Alexander Park, and during that time Ella assailed me about our Friend [Dr. Philippe]. I remained very quiet and gave dull answers, especially after she said that she [Alix’ italics] wanted to get to the bottom of it…

I am sure my answers are most unsatisfactory to her—let’s hope she will not begin again.  [Ref: Andrei Maylunas and Sergei Mironenko, A Lifelong Passion, (1997), pp. 216-127]

Apparently Ella was relentless because when Nicky had to leave for Kursk he wrote Alix:

Knowing I was leaving you all alone (except for the children) after such trying circumstances and with Ella too, made me all the more miserable…  [Ref: Andrei Maylunas and Sergei Mironenko, A Lifelong Passion, (1997), pp. 216-127]

I remember seeing a documentary on an early movie star who secret pregnancy had been discovered in the middle of a film she was making.  The Producer confronted her on the stage set and gave verbally lashing that was so severe she had a miscarriage that afternoon.   One can’t help wondering to what extent, if any the hostility towards Philippe had on Alix’ pregnancy. 

   

You know that is a good question Historyfan because I would have assumed that the Aug. correspondence would have been heavier as this was the time that Alix was working so hard to support her husband's conviction that he should remove the Grand Duke Nicholai as Commander-In-Chief and replace him with General M. V. Alekseev with himself acting in an advisory capacity.  

Wasn't he at home quite a bit of that month, though? Which explains the lighter correspondence.

I think that the volume of the Sept. 1915 correspondence has to do, in part, with changes that seemed necessary for several of the ministries and for the post of Over-Procurator.  I do hope that Matushka will help us sort through the complex issues involved with Varvarna and the canonization of John Maximovich.  

Joe Fuhrmann's book is interesting on this too - basically, Joe observes that Varnava was (and is) popular in Russia, and that the Synod's point of view on him - which is the one the world hears about and accepts as "right" - is only a part of the story. It's possible you made this observation elsewhere in the thread, but I can't remember now and it's such a big one it takes me a long while to go back....

Just as a follow-up with Ella and Philippe which I found interesting.  Janet's point of view about Alix' pregnancy is that it was real and that Alix miscarried a two-month old fetus.  I had somehow or other alwasys assumed that the Empress had an hysterical pregnancy which is not correct. 

Lets see the way Janet worked out the miscarriage.  She frames the miscarriage in her work on the Empress by looking back on it after the successful birth of Alexis.  Janet has Alix remember how Alexis' birth:

…reaffirmed my faith in myself after the miscarriage which was so nasty and alarming.  August 1902, that was: I’d been pregnant as far as I am aware for nine months (fact is, M.B. never came back after I stopped nursing Anastasia, and at the same time as that happened I began to feel sick again).  I’d not seen a doctor (why should I?—I was an old hand by then, and the majority of women don’t see doctors when they are pregnant—it’s not an illness!)  and although the baby didn’t seem as lively as the others had done I had no reason to think anything was wrong.  But then instead of a baby, M.B. turned up as if it had never been absent; I went to the doctors and was told that there was no pregnancy, I was simply anaemic.  They were wrong, of course (unbelievably!): next day I had a miscarriage, but the baby was so tiny one might have supposed it a two months child—whereas I knew I’d carried it for nine.  ‘Missed abortion’ I think the horrible term is.  Either that or I had genuinely been anaemic for the first seven months but somehow it had been conceived anyway—no-one could give a proper explanation.  Something went badly wrong, perhaps it simply failed to grow.  [Ref: Janet Ashton, The German Woman, (2008), pp. 156-157]

Janet’s clearly done a great deal of careful reasoning from first source information such as Xenia’s letters to Princess A. Obolensky, née Apraksine which state that Dr. Ott at first thought that there was no pregnancy.  In her August 19, 1902 letter to the Princess Xenia states:

…it seems poor A. F. [Alix} isn’t pregnant after all—for 9 months she had nothing, then suddenly it came, but completely normally, without any pain.  The day before yesterday [August 18], Ott [Doctor] saw here for the first time and confirmed that there was no pregnancy, but that luckily everything internally was all right.  He say that such cases do happen, and are caused by anaemia.  [Ref: Andrei Maylunas and Sergei Mironenko, A Lifelong Passion, (1997), p. 217]

Then in her August 20 letter to the Princess, Xenia relates that:

…This morning A. F. [Alix} had a minor miscarriage—if it could be called a miscarriage at all!—that is to say a tiny ovule came out!  Yesterday evening she had pains, and at night too, by morning it was all over when this event happened!  Now at last it will be possible to make an announcement and tomorrow a bulletin will be published in the papers—with information about what happened.  At last a natural way out of this unfortunate situation has been found.  She is in bed—as a precaution, as there can sometimes be bleeding in such cases.  Thank God she is in good health.  [Ref: Andrei Maylunas and Sergei Mironenko, A Lifelong Passion, (1997), p. 217]

I could be quite wrong about this, but yes, I DO think we should consider the possibility that she actually miscarried something as her doctor stated. I have known people who have had what they call a "missed miscarriage", and it is only because of scans and other modern technology that they realise the feotus has died and failed to abort. The foetus can even be re-absorbed, and the mother, believing herself still pregnant, continue to exhibit symptoms and get fatter. This must have happened more often before the scan was available. I am not quite sure about the end result of such a tragic pregnancy if undetected (these days the mother would be hospitalised to end it), but I presume the empty sac must finally be lost at some point, and I was wondering whether this might be what happened to Alexandra.

I also of course when I was writing the book also read a great deal about false or "hysterical" pregnancies, and I find the terminology - and the common assumption starting in her own era and continuing through most modern books (Alx de Jonge's Rasputin bio is a notable exception in that he describes it as the "most attractive explanation to this unfortunate woman's numerous detractors" and adds that perhaps she miscarried) that this had to be what happened to A because of course she was nuts - pretty dreadful. A lot of the latest research liteature decribes this sort of event as being produced by stress hormones - in short, it doesn't have a lot to do with being "unbalanced" at all, and is a purely medical event which can come about for a number of reasons ranging from wanting a child desperately, to dreading one, to something quite unrelated.
There isn't any direct evidence either that Philippe "convinced" Alexandra she was pregnant, and as far as I know this pregnancy didn't lead to his fall from grace - they continued to write to him until his death in 1905, and referred to him afterwards as "Our first Friend" with affection. As KR sensitively stated, "it is conjectured - on what basis I don't know - that he has influenced her to believe she is prgenant with a son..."

Anyway, this was my general take on the question of that pregnancy......

Terence I think that below is the photo you are referring to.  I believe it was taken in 1899.  The Grand Duke Alexander included a photo of Alix in the same dotted Swiss and insertion lace afternoon gown and feathered toque on the balcony at Bernsdorff which Alix has signed and dated for 1899.  So I think it is safe to assume that the photo was taken in 1899.  I have another book with this photo but cannot manage to find it presently as most of my library is packed up. 

The body language in the photo is really interesting.  Thanks for your imput. 

Thanks, that indeed is the photo I was thinking of.  Glad to know the date it was taken.  I had assumed it was earlier, at the beginning of N. II's reign.  To me, if I didn't know who the subjects were, I'd asssume the lady leaning over the man was his spouse.  Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but I do think the body language is revealing.

And thanks for your work here.  I eagerly await yout next installment.  You and others here are what makes this site such a great source for learning about history.

Regards
T

I want to respond more fully to the wonderful information Janet has shared but just quickly...

Wasn't he at home quite a bit of that month, though? Which explains the lighter correspondence. 

Thanks Janet, that is spot on.  I checked my August 1915 file which is 52 pages and covers the ten days between Aug. 22 - Sept 2, while my  Sept. 1915 file, which is 110 pages, covers 21 days between Sept. 1 - Sept. 22.  So the Empress volume really remains the same. 
   
Terrence also thanks so much for your observations which I think are merited.  As upset as Ella was with Nicky and Alix for becoming involved with Philippe, it appears that the target of her actual anger was directed at the Stana, Duchess of Leuthenburg and her sister the Grand Duchess Militzia.  But her domineering attitude towards her younger sister is exposed by her body language in the photograph.  It is not hard to see in Ella's posturing in the photo what Alix expressed in her letter to Nicky, how Ella "...said that she [Alix’ italics] wanted to get to the bottom of it [Philippe affair]…" 

I have more to share but I have got to run....   

Joe Fuhrmann's book is interesting on this too - basically, Joe observes that Varnava was (and is) popular in Russia, and that the Synod's point of view on him - which is the one the world hears about and accepts as "right" - is only a part of the story. It's possible you made this observation elsewhere in the thread, but I can't remember now and it's such a big one it takes me a long while to go back....

I am ordering Joe's book on Rasputin.  In the meantime I have found his footnotes about the Synod's Varnava Inquest helpful.  I still hope Matushka will contribute her point of view.  I am finishing Abraham Ascher's book on Stolypin and I must say that it is a fine book.  

Ascher remains objective and at the same time gives an positive view of the Stolypin while not trying to hide his weakness or the failure of some of his reforms.  He avoids what The Wall Street Journal referred to as "the sort of hagiography that Solzhenitsyn doled in."  

I was immersed in the same kind of hagiography when it came to Stolypin and I remember several debates on this website where I had insisted that Stolypin’s agrarian reform was a complete success.  I now understand that Stolypin’s agrarian reform, while doing great good at first did start to loose momentum after 1910.  However it was not the success of the various reforms that Ascher judges Stolypin's worth by, but it was his vision for Russia which remains sound.  

I want to refer to Stolypin's 1909 address to the Duma on the Tsar role over the Most Holy Synod as it appears to parallel the Empress’ concept.  I also want to explore Stolypin’s point of view in connection with the Samarin's concept of the Synod's autonomy.  

Joe has it that Nicholas offended the Synod and denigrated it by his telegram approving the beautification of John [Ioann] Maximovich after the Synod had denied Varnava's request.  There are many issues here that need to be looked at; among them is a clearer understanding of the kind of circumstances that demanded the Over-Procurator consultation with the Tsar and those areas where the Over-Procurator could act without consulting the Tsar.  

If I am not mistaken the appointment and or the discipline of the Higher Clergy was one of the areas that belonged to the Tsar’s control and not the Over-Procurator, but I need to review Curtiss’s carefully researched work on this point.  

There are other complications about Synod’s Varnava Inquest that have less to do with religious issues of the Synod's autonomy as the Over-Procurator’s plotting against Rasputin.  

One can’t help but wonder if the Beautification issue was not used as a trap by Samarin to force Varnava to turn on Rasputin.  Certainly there is the fact that the Over-Procurator came to Varnava’s hotel room prior to the Synod Inquest proceeding and attempted to force him to betray Rasputin.  

However the most important issue here is the Samarin’s desire to replace Varnava with the disgraced Hermogen, a man that both Curtiss and Radzinsky credit with starting the rumour in 1911 that the Empress was Rasputin’s lover.  I will find the exact references when I explore the topic after I finish posting the Sept. 1915 correspondence.  

The reappearance of violent Hermogen alerted me to an issue that I want to fully explore and which I have been made aware of by reading Orlando Figes and Boris Kolonitskii’s brilliant work, Interpreting The Russian Revolution.  The Language and Symbols of 1917,.  

In Chapter One, The Desacralization of the Monarchy: Rumours and the Downfall of the Romanovs,, Figes and Kolonitskii lay great stress on the role rumours that the Empress was a German spy, but more importantly that she and Ania Vyrubova’s were Rasputin’s lovers.  Figes and Kolonitskii refer to the latter as the political pornography that created a mood that helped to organize society and the people in the streets to accept revolution as necessary solution.  Figes/Kolonitskii tell us that:

…the point of all these rumours was not their truth or untruth, but their ability to unify and mobilize an angry public against the monarchy.  And here there was an astonishing degree of acceptance at all levels of society that the treason allegations were already proved.

Even the most educated believed them Zinaida Gippius noted in her diary in September 1915:  ‘In the final analysis the government is not even fighting the Germans—it does not care about Russia…The Tsar is a traitor…’   [Ref: Orlando Figes and Boris Kolonitskii,  Interpreting The Russian Revolution.  The Language and Symbols of 1917, (1999), p. 19]

Gippius also believed the rumours about Alix and Ania as Rasputin’s lover.  She notes in her diary:

‘Grisha is governing and getting his way with the ladies in waiting…And with Feodorovna [the Empress], as usual.’  [Ref: Orlando Figes and Boris Kolonitskii,  Interpreting The Russian Revolution.  The Language and Symbols of 1917, (1999), p. 13]



 

[Letter No. 117. Tsarskoje Selo, Sept. 9-th 1915]

Most importantly and the authors make the point that the:

…political effect of all these sexual scandals was manifold.  The rumours served to tarnish the image of the court, to desacralize the monarchy and strip it of all claims to divine authority, let alone the respect of its citizens.  Laughter and mockery deprived the Tsar of power; and this was symbolized by his sexual impotence, which, according to the stories, had driven the Tsarina into Rasputin’s arms.  A man who could not rule or satisfy his wife could not be taken seriously as a tsar.  [Ref: Orlando Figes and Boris Kolonitskii, Interpreting The Russian Revolution.  The Language and Symbols of 1917, (1999), p. 14]
 
It will be interesting to explore the part Samarin’s was playing to desacralize the monarchy and strip it of all claims to divine authority by promoting a Bishop such as Hermogen who had first spread the smutty rumours about the Empress being Rasputin’s lover.  It would also be interesting to know if Samarin, like so many others, believed that Rasputin was a German agent.   

Regardless, I think the issue of the desacralization of the monarchy the corrosive effects of political pornography helps us appreciate what Alix could not give a name to, but what she rightly understood to be highly dangerous and destructive:   

 Letter No. 117.  Tsarskoje Selo, Sept. 9-th 1915
& who calumniates people you respect & insults them – insults you, that they dare not call a Bishop to account for knowing Gregory – I cant repeat to you all the names they gave our Friend. 

Letter No. 117.  Tsarskoje Selo, Sept. 9-th 1915
– I shall have to suffer for it if he [Samarin] remains, as I shall get it onto my head, you heard what the Governor said, & here one is not kindly intentioned towards me in some sets & its not the time to drag one’s Sovereign or his wife down. 

Letter No. 117.  Tsarskoje Selo, Sept. 9-th 1915
These are the last fights for yr. internal Victory, show them yr. mastery.

The Varnava controversy will end with the removal of Ella's "spiritual father," the Metropolitan Vladimir of St. Petersburg who will be transferred to Kiev as a result of his opposition to Varnava, the beautification of the    However by his own admission he will continue to spend most of his time in St. Petersburg.  His removal had to have greatly increased Ella’s anxiety over Rasputin.     

The motivation here is complex and there are many issues that need to be explored in greater detail.  The Empress was clearly interfering with the prerogatives of the office of Over-Procurator who maintained the exclusive right to consult the Tsar on Church matters alone and who did not allow Bishops that right unless he gave them his permission. 

At the same time Samarin’s controversy with Varnava was not simply about Varnava’s abuse of authority.  There was clearly an independent political agenda that Samarin shared in common with a faction in the Duma and his political agenda supported of the rumours that were organizing society’s denigration of the throne; an issue that Alix clearly recognized and warned Nicky about. 

[Letter No. 117. Tsarskoje Selo, Sept. 9-th 1915]

I wanted to say that I did some additional research about the volume of correspondence in Sept. 1915 and compared the length of the Empress’ letters with those she wrote in August and found that while they were approximately the same as those written in early September [2 to 2 ½ pages], starting at about Sept. 9 the length crept up to 3 to 3 ½ pages with the Empress even asking Nicky:

Letter No. 117.  Tsarskoje Selo, Sept. 9-th 1915
– Now the endless letter must be finished.  Do I write too much? 

Mogilev. 9 September, 1915.
I thank you, I thank you for your dear, long letters, which now come more regularly - about 9.30 in the evening.  Nicky

Again I believe the increase in the length of the letters came from directly from Nicky’s request for Alix’ help in his August 25 letter.  I believe that explains, in part why the length of the Empress’ letters increased.  Clearly the tone of the Empress is more assured because Nicky had specifically asked for her help. 

Stavka. 25 August, 1915.
Think, my Wify, will you not come to the assistance of Your hubby now that he is absent?  What a pity that you have not been fulfilling this duty for a long time [long ago] or at least during the war!... Nicky

Letter No. 104.  Tsarskoje Selo, Aug, 28-th 1915
Oh Sweetheart, I am  s o  touched you want my help, I am always ready to do anything for you, only never liked mixing up without being asked - only here I felt too much was at stake. -


Because there are so many issues that we need to look at I thought it might help to review some of the information from John Shelton Curtiss, “Church and State in Russia, 1900-1917,” as it will help us ponder some of the major issues that we will face in determining the Empress’s feelings about the Most Holy Synod and the Over-Procurator in relationship to the canonization of Ioann [John] Maximovich of Tobolsk.  I think by reviewing the information about the Tsar’s traditional role in issues that that involved canonization.  By reviewing the difference between canonical law which limited the Tsar’s power over the Most Holy Synod in matters of faith and dogma, Russian law did not. 

There are clearly several issues here that also will become clearer when we review the power that the Over-Procurator wielded and why his insolent remarks on the Tsar’s authority were so alarming to the Empress.  I think it is clear that Samarin did not fulfill his duty to the Tsar or keep him informed of those areas where he was obliged to gain the Emperor’s approval, such as the removal or appointment of Bishops. 

The other thing that is interesting is how few Bishops were comprised the sessions of the Synod, how seldom the sessions were held, and how quickly the Bishops were dispersed back to their diocese.  It is not clear that Samarin kept the Tsar informed about any of these administrative decisions which would have directly violated his duty.  However I do not have any sources to confirm my suspicions.  The basis of my theory is the Empress’ concerns about Samarin appointing Hermogen which is something that he would have needed to directly consult the Tsar about.  It is also safe to say that the Tsar was not informed of Varnava’s censuring by the Most Holy Synod. 

There is the issue of Samarin’s political agenda as a member of the Council of Ministers and where or not be believed the rumours about Rasputin’s pro-German sympathies or whether his concerns about Rasputin were based on the Far-Right’s concerns that Rasputin was destroying the prestige of the throne. 

In any case, as we shall learn Samarin was clearly motivated by hostility towards the Empress.  His insulting attitude to the Empress in public and his equally vulgar remarks about her in private were enough to insure his removal from office with or without the Rasputin controversy.         

TSAR, “SUPREME DEFENDER AND PRESERVER” OF ORTHODOX FAITH

TSAR’S POWER OVER THE MOST HOLY SYNOD

As was stated in the beginning of this chapter, the emperor, as “supreme defender and preserver of the dogmas of the ruling faith,” had the right to supervise “the orthodoxy of belief and the decorum in the holy Church.”  In exercising its control over the church “The autocratic authority acts through the agency of the Most High Synod, which was established by it”;...  [Ref: John Shelton Curtiss, “Church and State in Russia, 1900-1917,” p. 39]
   

CANONICAL LAW LIMITS TSAR’S POWER OVER SYNOD

...according to one of the greatest authorities on the history of Russian law, the power of the Tsar did not extend to matters of dogma, for

“...in defining the competence of the Synod one must keep in mind that the Russian Church, a local church, is part of the Church Universal.  Consequently, for the former the dogmas and the rules recognized and confirmed by the Ecumenical Councils [the last one, according to Orthodox teaching, met in 787 A.D.] are binding.  Moreover, as a part of the Universal Church, it cannot have a visible head with legislative authority in questions of dogma; in this respect the Orthodox Church differs radically from the Catholic Church, which recognizes a visible head in the person of the Pope.  [quoted by Curtiss from A. D. Gradovskii, Sobranie Sochinenii,, VIII, 388.] 

If the Tsar acted through the Synod, and the Synod was thus limited in power, it follows that the Russian emperor did not possess the power to change the dogma of the Russian Church; according to this definition, his authority extended only to what might be termed administrative control.  [Ref: John Shelton Curtiss, “Church and State in Russia, 1900-1917,” p. 39]

[RUSSIAN LAW DOES NOT LIMIT TSAR’S POWER OVER SYNOD]

RUSSIAN LAW DOES NOT LIMIT TSAR’S POWER OVER SYNOD

...nowhere did the Russian laws forbid [Curtiss’ italics] the emperor to interfere personally in matters of faith and dogma, and actually in several instances the Tsars did act in cases which touched the sacraments and the beliefs of the church... 

Considerable evidence exists to show that on several occasions the emperors intervened in questions involving faith and morals, which were not included in cases reserved for their decisions...   [Ref: John Shelton Curtiss, “Church and State in Russia, 1900-1917,” p. 40-41]

 
TSARS OFTEN RULED ON DOGMA

Perhaps the most significant type of imperial action in purely religious matters was that taken in cases of canonization.  In 1903, after an investigation, the Synod decided to canonize the holy man, Serafim of Sarov; but Serafim was raised to the sainthood only after the emperor had noted his approval on the report of the Synod’s decision.  Nor was this an exceptional instance; studies of canonizations in the nineteenth century show that in each case the approval of the emperor was obtained, and on at least one occasion the Tsar, Nicholas I, began the proceedings by ordering the Synod to start the investigation which led to the canonization of a saint.  From these facts it appears that the power of the Tsar over the church was not clearly defined, and that on more than one occasion he intervened in matters which were in the spiritual sphere.  [Ref: John Shelton Curtiss, “Church and State in Russia, 1900-1917,” p. 41-42]


SYNOD MUST GAIN TSAR’S APPROVAL ON ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUES

...if the Synod desired to supplement the powers originally conferred upon it or “to explain and amplify the existing law or to draw up a new decree” was it required to submit its proposals for imperial consideration.  To be sure, if the Synod failed to reach a unanimous decision when considering a matter, the Over Procurator might, at his discretion, submit the question to the emperor for final solution...  [Ref: John Shelton Curtiss, “Church and State in Russia, 1900-1917,” p. 39-40]


TSAR, NOT SYNOD, CHOSE NEW BISHOPS

In respect to appointments the emperor’s power was more extensively used.  When a new vicarian or diocesan bishop was to be named, three candidates were selected by the Synod; from these three the emperor chose the one to receive the position.  [Ref: John Shelton Curtiss, “Church and State in Russia, 1900-1917,” p. 40]


TSAR, NOT SYNOD, CHOSE PERMANENT MEMBERS OF SYNOD

Moreover, the Tsar named the (permanent) members of the Synod, and summoned those bishops who were chosen for temporary attendance at its sessions; the latter were ordered to sit in the Synod “until it is the Imperial will that they should return to their dioceses.”  [Ref: John Shelton Curtiss, “Church and State in Russia, 1900-1917,” p. 40]

The Synod consisted of twelve prelates—four “members” ex officio (three metropolitans, and the exarch of Georgia, although the latter in actuality attended but rarely) and eight or nine bishops, who were summoned by special commands of the Tsar to be present at the meetings of the Synod, and who were known as “those attending.”  All the prelates who composed the Synod, whether actual “members” or not, attended the Synod only upon receiving special commands from the Tsar.  Their attendance was limited in duration to the periods specified in the summons.

However, while nominally the summons came from the emperor, the names were proposed to him by the Over Procurator, so that the latter was responsible for their attendance.  Moreover the attendance of the bishops was often brief.  The Synod’s meetings were grouped in three annual sessions, winter, summer, and fall, and usually only six of the twelve hierarchs were asked to attend at a given session.  Consequently the bishops and metropolitans were summoned for short periods—for three months, six months, or at most a year.  [Ref: John Shelton Curtiss, Church and State in Russia, 1900-1917, (second printing 1972),  pp. 44-45]

OFFICE OF OVER PROCURATOR

SECULAR/POLITICAL CHARACTER OF OVER PROCURATOR’S OFFICE

Some of the Over Procurators—for instance Chebyshev, Melissino, Protasov, and Count D. A. Tolstoi—were antireligious in nature.  These officials treated the bishops as subordinates to be brought into full subjection, and upon the slightest sent bishops into retirement and very frequently transferred them from one diocese to another.  The practice of transferring bishops was especially widely used under Pobedonostsev, although a very devout man; during his administration the term of service of the greater part of the bishops did not exceed four years in one diocese.   [Ref: John Shelton Curtiss, “Church and State in Russia, 1900-1917,” p. 51]

[OVER-PROCURATOR’S CONTROL OF SYNOD]

OVER-PROCURATOR’S CONTROL OF SYNOD

There were several ways in which this control was exercised.  First: the Over Procurator was the intermediary between the Synod and the emperor.  He alone reported to the sovereign concerning the affairs of the church; he requested the imperial consent and confirmation which was expressly required for certain general decrees for the church, and by failure to report to them to the emperor, could prevent confirmation of such decisions of the Synod.  Conversely, he interpreted to the Synod the thought and will of the emperor, both on the general trend of church affairs and on individual matters pertaining to the church.  He was the guardian for the fulfillment of the legal regulations for the Religious Administration.  To him was given the duty of seeing to the “proper, timely, and lawful course and decision of matters in the Most Holy Synod.  He was given “full power to publish Imperial ukazes.”  Furthermore, at the time of the consideration of business in the Synod “the Over Procurator enjoys the right to explain the laws and to point to other circumstances which may have weight in deciding these matters; in the event of disagreement of the members,…either to stop the consideration of the matter, or to present it to the Highest Authority [the Tsar] for consideration.”   [Ref: John Shelton Curtiss, “Church and State in Russia, 1900-1917,” p. 44]

 
OVER PROCURATOR’S CONTROL OVER BISHOPS

Without doubt the Over Procurator could and did exercise control over the bishops.  Those disposed to choose the easier way readily accepted the control; the strong-willed often found themselves out of favor, and were sent to the less desirable dioceses, or worse, into retirement.  But if by some chance a bishop was able to stand against this influence, it availed little.  For the arm of the Synod—in truth, of the Over Procurator—was long, and many were the matters of diocesan administration which could be settled only after reference to the central authorities.  The bishops might not appoint or discharge any of the instructors in the religious seminary in his diocese; he might not remove them, even when they were known to him to be libertines or radicals.  Much of the control over the parish schools was in the hands of the many officials of the Synod.  Then, too, when churches were to be built in the far-off provinces, the official architects from the capital had to be called in to pass upon the work and to watch it for a day or two.  No large-scale repairs might be made in churches of the provincial towns or in other large centers without similar approval.  When choosing or changing the printer for the Diocesan News, the diocesan authorities had to obtain approval and confirmation from St. Petersburg.  No religious brotherhood or trusteeship might be formed, no harsh abbot might be removed, until after correspondence with the Synod and until the bureaucratic machine had ground out its answer.  [Ref: John Shelton Curtiss, “Church and State in Russia, 1900-1917,” pp. 52-53]


…a man attained the episcopal rank, even if he had the best intentions and the sincerest piety in the world, he could do little in his diocese if he opposed the will of the Over Procurator.  There were too many weapons in that official’s armory.  The power to appoint and to remove bishops was reserved for the emperor, after proposals by the Synod…As Bishop Vladimir of Ekaterinburg wrote in 1905, “Personally our sovereigns have known very few candidates for Episcopal sees, and, while keeping the form of choice by the Most Holy Synod, have handed the actual control over appointments into the keeping of favorites or of the Over Procurators…”   [Ref: John Shelton Curtiss, “Church and State in Russia, 1900-1917,” pp. 50-51]

BISHOPS PROHIBITED FROM EXERTING INFLUENCE ON TSAR

It must not be thought that the bishops and metropolitans could exert influence directly upon the sovereign in such a manner as to counteract the efforts of the Over Procurator, for these dignitaries were not allowed audiences with the emperor except in those rare cases when the Over Procurator arranged for them.  This layman was the church’s only spokesman at court.

Even without the sole right of reporting to the emperor, the Over Procurator would still have been able to hold control over the hierarchs of the Synod, for he was responsible for their presence at its meetings...During these brief terms they had little opportunity to exert much influence.  Probably prelates who were known to be hostile to the policies of the Over Procurator were rarely summoned to the Synod, for if the summons was not requested by him even the metropolitans remained nominal members of the Synod.  As a result of their quarrel with the Over Procurator Protasov in 1842, Filaret of Moscow and Filaret of Kiev, two of the most noted metropolitans of the Russian Church, were not summoned to the Synod for many years.  Hence the Synod was as a general rule composed of clergy who were attentive to the wishes of the Over Procurator.  [Ref: John Shelton Curtiss, Church and State in Russia, 1900-1917, (second printing 1972),  pp. 44-45]


NO INDEPENDENT INFLUENCE POSSIBLE IN SYNOD

It must not be supposed that even an aggressive and independent churchman, if such a one should be named to attend the meetings of the Synod, could accomplish much.  The permanent lay officials of the Synod chanceries were much more important.  As on bishop wrote in 1905,

The Most Synod is least of all like…a holy Church Council.  The Synod is a governmental institution: when you enter it, a concierge with a mace greets you; then footmen with gold and silver medals, and farther on, officials, officials without end…and among them four or five old bishops, who in summer put in an appearance once a week, and in winter, twice a week, for two hours at a time.  They are offered various matters to be voted on, sometimes merely the unimportant ones…As long as we have not freed ourselves from the officials, nothing can be said concerning the freedom of the Church.  [Ref: John Shelton Curtiss, “Church and State in Russia, 1900-1917,” pp. 45-46]

[LAY OFFICIALS OF SYNOD HOLD THE POWER]

LAY OFFICIALS OF SYNOD HOLD THE POWER

…owing to the briefness of the sessions and the great press of business, the members of the Synod had little time for deliberation and consideration.  For the most part they were forced simply to pass hastily upon reports and decisions drown up by the lay officials of the central administration.  The actual decisions were so often made by the chancery bureaucrats rather than by the ecclesiastical members of the Synod that Bishop Nikon of Vladimir stated in 1905 that “in the Most Holy Synod a tiny part of the business…[is] reported to the Synod meeting, and the great bulk of the cases…[are] decided in the chancery and…[are] presented to the [ecclesiastical] members in their rooms, merely for signature.”  According to another bishop who wrote at the same time, most of the decrees of the Synod were formulated by the lay officials in the Synod chancery, and the hierarchs of the Synod signed them automatically, with little or not attempt to inquire into the facts in each case…

So firmly was the real power over the administration of the church in the hands of the lay officials that Professor P. V. Verkhovskoi, of the Imperial University of Warsaw, writing in 1916, stated that he hierarchs of the Synod often knew nothing of the Synod business until it was placed before them in reports of the lay officials.  After reaching the Synod offices, matters might lie for years without action; moreover, the decision of the Synod might never be carried out.  As Bishop Lavrentii of Tula wrote in 1905, “not one decision will be given for signature to members of the Most Holy Synod if the Over Procurator has not…looked at it”; in like fashion, “not one decision signed by all the members of the Most Holy Synod will be executed if it does not bear the counter-signature of the Over Procurator, ‘To be carried out.’”  The lay officials serving in the central administration of the church were without exception appointed by him; and from him came their pensions and advancement.  Consequently he and not the bishops and the metropolitans possessed the support and the loyalty of the officials.  Is it any wonder that when the Synod members made independent suggestions to officials of the chancery, nothing came of it but the response, “We will refer this to His Eminence.”?  [Ref: John Shelton Curtiss, “Church and State in Russia, 1900-1917,” pp. 46-47]


GOVERNORS AND POLICE AS AGENTS OF THE OVER PROCURATOR

...the care which the provincial governors were required to exercise in behalf of the Orthodox Church.  They were instructed in all cases and with all the powers given to them, to aid the Orthodox spiritual authorities in protecting the rights of the Church and the soundness of its belief, by watching carefully so that heresy, schism, and other errors born of prejudice and ignorance may not be spread among the inhabitants of the province entrusted to them, and so that (in order to avert this evil and the disaffection caused by it) at the proper moment all those measures enumerated in the general regulations and in the special Imperial commands may be used...

Furthermore,

...the governors, acting through the city and the county police, shall ensure that during the conduct of divine service and all other church ceremonies the proper quiet and decorum are not disturbed by anyone, and that for all actions violating this decorum, even though unintentional, the guilty shall be required to answer according to law.  The governors shall in this connection provide the necessary protection and assistance for the other religious faith practiced freely within the Empire, making sure, however, that no one shall be led astray into these faiths from Orthodoxy; and in general they are not to allow anyone belonging to the sects forbidden by law to attract converts to the said faiths. 

Thus the governors, and through them the police, were ordered to limit the missionary work of the non-Orthodox denominations.  [Ref: John Shelton Curtiss, Church and State in Russia, 1900-1917, (second printing 1972),  pp. 37-38]

Knowing the control that the Over-Procurator had over Governors it is not suprising that the Empress suspected Samarin when the once friendly Governor [of Siberia ? = Fuhrmann] became hostile to Rasputin in 1915.  Clearly with Samarin's power as Over-Procurator Bishops had no alternative but to obey.